Powell, Timothy B2023-05-232014-01-022011-10-012017-09-18https://repository.upenn.edu/handle/20.500.14332/45803As the term “digital repatriation” gains wider circulation, it has come under increased scrutiny and criticism. At the 2010 AAA Annual Meeting in New Orleans, Kim Christen convened an Executive Program Committee session entitled “After the Return: Digital Repatriation and the Circulation of Indigenous Knowledge.” Despite abundant examples of how digital technology creates opportunities for working in partnership with indigenous communities, questions focused on the inadequacies of the term “digital repatriation.” Panelist Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh (Denver Museum of Nature and Science) stated the problem most succinctly by recounting that the Native communities he worked with always wanted to know if “digital repatriation” meant that they were going to get the original materials back. The answer, of course, was no.This is the peer reviewed version of the following article, which has been published in final form at dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-3502.2011.52733.x. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving (http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-820227.html#terms).Digital HumanitiesIndigenous StudiesReligionSocial and Cultural AnthropologyArticle