Abstract
Criminologists are increasingly considering ‘the visual’ within their research, both as objects of study and through the use of visual methodologies. Within this trend, Photovoice provides an innovative, collaborative, and empowering visual research method that allows for in-depth engagement with lived experiences, particularly with underrepresented and previously ‘unseen’ communities, with the intention to foster social change. Photovoice relies on meaningful collaboration between researchers and stakeholders, so that the research is co-created between researchers and participants, therefore democratising the knowledge generation and exchange process. This chapter considers the use and potential effectiveness of Photovoice as a visual research method to further our understanding of art crime. It is argued that criminological enquiry into the illicit trade of cultural objects would benefit from utilising Photovoice to shed light on un(der)represented perspectives and lived experiences to better inform the debate around the production, protection, trade and ownership of cultural objects.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Please note: pseudonyms are used throughout this chapter to protect the identity of participants.
References
Armstrong, S. (2017). Seeing and seeing-as: Building a politics of visibility in criminology. In M. Brown & E. Carrabine (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of visual criminology (pp. 416–426). Routledge.
Atalay, S. (2012). Community-based archaeology: Research with, by, and for indigenous and local communities. University of California Press.
Azoulay, A. (2008). The civil contract of photography. Zone Books & MIT Press.
Bal, M. (2003). Visual essentialism and the object of visual culture. Journal of Visual Culture, 2(1), 5–32.
Bangdel, L. (1989). Stolen images of Nepal. Royal Nepal Academy.
Baudrillard, J. (1970). The consumer society. SAGE Publications.
Baudrillard, J. (1997). The system of collecting. In J. Elsner & R. Cardinal (Eds.), Cultures of collecting (pp. 7–24). Reaktion Books.
Becker, H. (2002). Visual evidence: A seventh man, the specified generalization, and the work of the reader. Visual Studies, 17(1), 3–11.
Bennett, J. (2012). Practical aesthetics: Events, affects and art after 9/11. IB Tauris.
Birch, M., & Miller, T. (2002). Encouraging participation: Ethics and responsibilities. In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop, & T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (pp. 91–106). SAGE.
Bolton, A., Pole, C., & Mizen, P. (2001). Picture this: Researching child workers. Sociology, 35(2), 501–518.
Brisman, A. (2017). Representations of environmental crime and harm: A green cultural criminological perspective on human-altered landscapes. In M. Brown & E. Carrabine (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of visual criminology (pp. 523–539). Routledge.
Brisman, A. (2018). Representing the “invisible crime” of climate change in an age of post-truth. Theoretical Criminology, 22(3), 468–491.
Brodie, N. (2014a). The internet market in precolumbian antiquities. In J. Kila & M. Balcells (Eds.), Cultural property crime: An overview and analysis on contemporary perspectives and trends (pp. 237–262). Brill.
Brodie, N. (2014b). Auction houses and the antiquities trade. In S. Choulia-Kapeloni (Ed.), 3rd international conference of experts on the return of cultural property (pp. 71–82). Archaeological Receipts Fund.
Brodie, N. (2019). Through a glass, darkly: Long-term antiquities auction data in context. International Journal of Cultural Property, 26(3), 265–283.
Brodie, N., Dietzler, J., & Mackenzie, S. (2013). Trafficking in cultural objects: An empirical overview. In S. Manacorda & A. Visconti (Eds.), Beni culturali e sistema penale (pp. 19–30). Vita e Pensiero.
Brown, M. (2014). Visual criminology and carceral studies: Counter-images in the carceral age. Theoretical Criminology, 18(2), 176–197.
Capous-Desyllas, M., & Forro, V. A. (2014). Tensions, challenges, and lessons learned: Methodological reflections from two Photovoice projects with sex workers. Journal of Community Practice, 22(1–2), 150–175.
Carrabine, E. (2011). Images of torture: Culture, politics and power. Crime, Media, Culture, 7(1), 5–30.
Carrabine, E. (2012). Just images: Aesthetics, ethics and visual criminology. The British Journal of Criminology, 52(3), 463–489.
Carrabine, E. (2014). Seeing things: Violence, voyeurism and the camera. Theoretical Criminology, 18(2), 134–158.
Castleden, H., Garvin, T., & Huu-Ay-Aht First, N. (2008). Modifying Photovoice for community-based participatory Indigenous research. Social Science & Medicine, 66(6), 1393–1405.
Chataway, C. F. (1997). An examination of the constraints on mutual inquiry in a participatory action research project. Journal of Social Issues, 53(4), 747–765.
Coggins, C. (1969). Illicit traffic of pre-columbian antiquities. Art Journal, Fall, 94–98.
Colwell, C. (2016). Collaborative archaeologies and descendant communities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 45, 113–127.
Colwell, C. (2017). Plundered skulls and stolen spirits: Inside the fight to reclaim native America’s culture. University of Chicago Press.
Contreras, D. (2010). Huaqueros and remote sensing imagery: Assessing looting damange in the Virú Valley, Peru. Antiquity, 84(324), 544–555.
Contreras, D., & Brodie, N. (2010). Quantifying destruction: An evaluation of the utility of publicly-available satellite imagery for investigating looting of archaeological sites in Jordan. Journal of Field Archaeology, 35, 101–114.
Dedrick, M. (2018). Photovoice as a method for the development of collaborative archaeological practice. Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage, 5(2), 85–100.
Dicks, B., Soyinka, B., & Coffey, A. (2006). Multimodal ethnography. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 77–96.
Edwards, E. (2012). Objects of affect: Photography beyond the image. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41(1), 221–234.
Elia, R. J. (1997). Looting, collecting, and the destruction of archaeological resources. Nonrenewable Resources, 6, 85–98.
Fals-Borda, O., & Rahman, M. A. (1991). Action and knowledge–Breaking the monopoly with participatory action-research. Apex Press.
Fitzgibbon, W., & Healy, D. (2019). Lives and spaces: Photovoice and offender supervision in Ireland and England. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 19(1), 3–25.
Fitzgibbon, W., & Stengel, C. M. (2018). Women’s voices made visible: Photovoice in visual criminology. Punishment & Society, 20(4), 411–431.
Gilgan, E. (2001). Looting and the market for Maya objects: A Belizean perspective. In N. Brodie, J. Doole, & C. Renfrew (Eds.), Trade in illicit antiquities: The destruction of the world’s archaeological heritage (pp. 73–88). McDonald Institute.
Gill, D., & Chippindale, C. (1993). Material and intellectual consequences of esteem for Cycladic figures. American Journal of Archaeology, 97(4), 601–659.
Global Nepali Museum. (n.d.). About Us [online]. Retrieved June 9, 2021, from https://globalnepalimuseum.com/about-us/
Grady, J. (2004). Working with visible evidence: An invitation and some practical advice. In C. Knowles & P. Sweetman (Eds.), Picturing the social landscape: Visual methods in the sociological imagination (pp. 18–31). Routledge.
Grimshaw, A. (2001). The ethnographer’s eye: Ways of seeing in modern anthropology. Cambridge University Press.
Harper, D. (2012). Visual sociology. Routledge.
Hayward, K. (2010). Opening the lens: Cultural criminology and the image. In K. Hayward & K. Presdee (Eds.), Framing crime: Cultural criminology and the image (pp. 1–16). Routledge.
Healy, D., & Fitzgibbon, W. (2020). Different ways of seeing: Exploring audience reactions to images of probation supervision. Qualitative Social Work, 19(4), 663–684.
Hollowell-Zimmer, J. (2003). Digging in the dirt: Ethics and “low-end looting”. In L. J. Zimmerman, K. D. Vitelli, & J. Hollowell-Zimmer (Eds.), Ethical issues in archaeology (pp. 45–56). AltaMira Press.
Keller, C., Fleury, J., Perez, A., Ainsworth, B., & Vaughan, L. (2008). Using visual methods to uncover context. Qualitative Health Research, 18(3), 428–436.
Kersel, M. (2012). The value of a looted object: Stakeholder perceptions in the antiquities trade. In R. Skeates, C. McDavid, & J. Carman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public archaeology (pp. 253–272). Oxford University Press.
Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2008). A social constructionist framing of the research interview. In J. Holstein & J. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 429–444). Guilford Press.
Liamputtong, P. (2010). Performing qualitative cross-cultural research. Cambridge University Press.
Liebenberg, L. (2018). Thinking critically about Photovoice. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1–9.
Liechty, M. (2017). Far out: Countercultural seekers and the tourist encounter in Nepal. University of Chicago Press.
Linfield, S. (2010). The cruel radiance: Photography and political violence. University of Chicago Press.
Lykes, B. M. (2010). Silence(ing), voice(s) and gross violations of human rights: Constituting and performing subjectivities through PhotoPAR. Visual Studies, 25(3), 238–254.
Mackenzie, S. (2005). Going, going, gone: Regulating the market in illicit antiquities. Institute of Art and Law.
Mackenzie, S., & Davis, T. (2014). Temple looting in Cambodia: Anatomy of a statue trafficking network. British Journal of Criminology, 54(5), 722–740.
Mackenzie, S., & Yates, D. (2016). Collectors on illicit collecting: Higher loyalties and other techniques of neutralization in the unlawful collecting of rare and precious orchids and antiquities. Theoretical Criminology, 20(3), 340–357.
Marx, K. (1976). Capital: Volume 1. Penguin Books.
Masterson, V. A., Mahajan, S. L., & Tengö, M. (2018). Photovoice for mobilizing insights on human well-being in complex social-ecological systems: Case studies from Kenya and South Africa. Ecology and Society, 23(3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10259-230313
Matsuda, D. (1998). The ethics of archaeology, subsistence digging, and artifact looting in Latin America: Point, muted counterpoint. International Journal of Cultural Property, 7(1), 87–97.
Merryman, J. H. (1986). Two ways of thinking about cultural Property. American Journal of International Law, 80(4), 831–853.
Milne, E.-J., & Muir, R. (2020). Photovoice: A critical introduction. In L. Pauwels & D. Mannay (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 282–296). SAGE.
Mitchell, W. (1996). What do pictures “really” want? October, 77, 71–82.
Nørskov, V. (2002). Greek vases in new contexts: The collecting and trading of Greek vases—An aspect of the modern reception of antiquity. Aarhus University Press.
Parcak, S., Gathings, D., Childs, C., Mumford, G., & Cline, E. (2016). Satellite evidence of archaeological site looting in Egypt: 2002–2013. Antiquity, 90(349), 188–205.
Pauwels, L. (2010). Visual sociology reframed: An analytical synthesis and discussion of visual methods in social and cultural research. Sociological Methods & Research, 38(4), 545–581.
Pauwels, L. (2017). Key methods of visual criminology: An overview of different approaches and their affordances. In M. Brown & E. Carrabine (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of visual criminology (pp. 62–73). Routledge.
Prosser, J. (1998). Photographs within the sociological research process. In J. Prosser (Ed.), Image based research: A sourcebook for qualitative researchers (pp. 115–127). Falmer.
Remembering the Lost. (2021). About. Retrieved June 7, 2021, from http://rememberingthelost.com/
Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual methodologies. SAGE.
Schick, J. (2006). Gods are leaving the country: Art theft from Nepal. Orchid Press.
Sijapati, A. (2020, February 21). Replicating Nepal’s stolen gods. Nepali Times. Retrieved from https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/replicating-nepals-stolen-gods/
Sijapati, A. (2021, January 28). Nepal’s gods return from exile. Nepali Times. Retrieved from https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/nepals-gods-return-from-exile/
Smith, E. (2018). Illicit markets in the global city: The cultural property trade in Hong Kong. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Routledge.
Thapa, G., & Sharma, J. (2009). From insurgency to democracy: The challenges of peace and democracy-building in Nepal. International Political Science Review, 30(2), 205–219.
Tiwari, S., Shreshta, P., & Bjønness, H. (2017). Local right in World Heritage Sites: Learning from post-earthquake rehabilitation dynamics in the Kathmandu Valley. In P. Larsen (Ed.), World heritage and human rights (pp. 135–152). Routledge.
Traue, B., Blanc, M., & Cambre, C. (2018). Visibilities and visual discourses: Rethinking the social with the image. Qualitative Inquiry, 25(4), 327–337.
Tythacott, L., & Ardiyansyah, P. (Eds.). (2021). Returning Southeast Asia’s past. NUS Press.
UNESCO. (1970). Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illciit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, No. 11806, 823 U.N.T.S. 231 (14 Nov 1970).
Van Beurden, J. (2021). Ongemakkelijk Erfgoed: Koloniale collectives en teruggave in de Lage Landen. Walburg Pers.
Wagner, J. (2002). Contrasting images, complementary trajectories: Sociology, visual sociology and visual research. Visual Studies, 17(2), 160–171.
Wagner, J. (2020). Seeing things: Visual research and material culture. In L. Pauwels & D. Mannay (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 76–95). SAGE.
Wang, C. (1999). Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women’s health. Journal of Women’s Health, 8(2), 185–192.
Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24(3), 369–387.
Watson, S., & Waterton, E. (2010a). Reading the visual: Representation and narrative in the construction of heritage. Material Culture Review, 71, 84–97.
Watson, S., & Waterton, E. (2010b). Culture, heritage and representation: Perspectives on visuality and the past. Routledge.
Wong, R. (2015). A note on fieldwork in ‘dangerous’ circumstances: Interviewing illegal tiger skin suppliers and traders in Lhasa. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(6), 595–702.
Woodgate, R., Zurba, M., & Tennent, P. (2017). Worth a thousand words? Advantages, challenges and opportunities in working with Photovoice as a qualitative research method with youth and their families. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-18.1.2659
Yates, D., & Mackenzie, S. (2018). Heritage, crisis, and community crime prevention in Nepal. International Journal of Cultural Property, 25(2), 203–221.
Young, A. (2010). The scene of the crime: Is there such as thing as ‘just looking’? In K. Hayward & M. Presdee (Eds.), Framing crime: Cultural criminology and the image (pp. 83–97). Routledge.
Young, A. (2014). From object to encounter: Aesthetic politics and visual criminology. Theoretical Criminology, 18(2), 159–175.
Acknowledgements
This fieldwork was supported by the University of Glasgow and the Scottish Funding Council through the Global Challenges Research Fund. I wish to thank the individuals and organisations who generously shared their time, experience and perspectives for the purposes of this project.
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
Smith, E. (2021). Evaluating the Transformative Potential of Photovoice for Research into the Global Illicit Trade in Cultural Objects. 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_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84856-9_5
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)