We are very proud to present the new publication “From Risk to Response – How The Heritage Sector Addresses Illicit Trafficking”. The publication is part of the Horizon project Aurora (Artwork Unique RecognitiOn and tRacking through chemicAl encoded data, miniaturized devices and blockchain alliance)
In the first part of the publication we are brining to your attention seven engaging articles:
- Museum-Led Responses to Illicit Trafficking and Cross-Sectoral Cooperation – the case of the Hungarian National Museum by Péter Buzinkay, Anna Puskás, Lujza Varga
- The Theft and Recovery of Vlaho Bukovac’s “Annunciation Assembly in Sremski Karlovci 1861”to the Museum of Vojvodina: A Case Study in Cultural Heritage Protection and International Collaboration by Aleksandra Stefanov
- Artefacts, Roots and Networks: An Interdisciplinary Approach to fight Endangered Archaeology and The Trafficking of Cultural Objects by Vincent Michel, Maxime Girard, Éléonore Favier, Benjamin Omer
- Loom the Looters: Illicit Trafficking of Antiquities and Digital Means to Uncover It by Afroditi Kamara
- Impact of Activism: Center Against Trafficking in Works of Art and Its Key Areas of Action by Amra Ćebić, Dženan Jusufović
- Challenges and strategies in the protection of cultural heritage in rural communities. Experiences and proposals from the Comunidad Campesina de Miraflores (Yauyos, Peru) by Rafael Schmitt
- ICESCO’s Efforts in Combating the Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property in the Islamic World by Bilel Chebbi
The articles examine the persistent global challenge of illicit trade in cultural property through a set of rigorously documented case studies. Rather than offering a simple catalogue of incidents, the first part of this two-volume work maps the intricate legal, institutional and social dynamics that shape contemporary heritage protection.
One study follows the Hungarian National Museum as it negotiates a transition from traditional custodianship to active involvement in crime prevention. The analysis highlights the bureaucratic and legal complexities that accompany cooperation with law enforcement and customs agencies, revealing that the move from repository to partner in policing requires more than good intentions. A second case reconstructs the theft and recovery of Vlaho Bukovac’s Annunciation Assembly in Sremski Karlovci, 1861, demonstrating that restitution is rarely the product of dramatic breakthroughs. Instead it depends on sustained networks of trust and long-term diplomatic and professional collaboration.
Technological and interdisciplinary approaches feature prominently. Contributors from the ANCHISE project examine how satellite imagery, artificial intelligence and large-scale digital databases can identify looting risks and track artefacts. Yet their discussion also probes the ethical and methodological uncertainties surrounding algorithmic detection and the public circulation of sensitive archaeological data.
Other chapters foreground civic and community-based responses. The Center Against Trafficking in Works of Art in Bosnia and Herzegovina illustrates how activism can shape public policy, while the rural community of Miraflores in Peru links heritage protection to questions of identity and resilience. ICESCO’s initiatives in the Islamic world further expose the political complexity of establishing global norms.
By presenting these diverse perspectives without reducing them to a checklist of best practices, the volume invites scholars, practitioners and policymakers to engage with heritage protection as an evolving field of negotiation—where law, technology, activism and cultural memory converge in the struggle against illicit trafficking.
The activities are the part of AURORA (Artwork Unique RecognitiOn and tRacking through chemicAl encoded data, miniaturized devices and blockchain alliance) project that is being funded by the European Union Horizon Europe program.
More about AURORA project
Follow AURORA LinkedIn
“Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Executive Agency (REA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.”
