Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:30 am
Time: 2:30 am
Results for art crime
4 results foundAuthor: Haken, Jeremy Title: Transnational Crime In The Developing World Summary: This report analyzes the scale, flow, profit distribution, and impact of 12 different types of illicit trade: drugs, humans, wildlife, counterfeit goods and currency, human organs, small arms, diamonds and colored gemstones, oil, timber, fish, art and cultural property, and gold. Though the specific characteristics of each market vary, in general it can be said that these profitable and complex criminal operations originate primarily in developing countries, thrive in the space created by poverty, inequality, and state weakness, and contribute to forestalling economic prosperity for billions of people in countries across the world. Details: Washington, DC: Global Financial Integrity, 2011. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2011 at: http://www.gfip.org/storage/gfip/documents/reports/transcrime/gfi_transnational_crime_high-res.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.gfip.org/storage/gfip/documents/reports/transcrime/gfi_transnational_crime_high-res.pdf Shelf Number: 120716 Keywords: Art CrimeCounterfeitingDrug TraffickingFinancial CrimesHuman TraffickingIllicit TradeOffenses Against the EnvironmentTransnational CrimeWildlife Crime |
Author: Bradley, David Title: The Extent of Crime and Anti-social Behaviour Facing Designated Heritage Assets: Final Report Summary: Heritage crime has been defined as any offence which harms the value of England's heritage assets and their settings to this and future generations. There has been growing concern at the risks of crime and anti-social behaviour faced by designated heritage assets, but the true extent of heritage crime had remained difficult to measure. This study collated and analysed data on damage from criminal behaviour to heritage assets in England. The report provides a review of the data collection procedures undertaken by the study to identify those that are most effective in building understanding of the scale and nature of heritage crime. The report then tries to answer a series of key questions about heritage crime. Finally there are some conclusions and selective recommendations aimed at improving future understanding of heritage crime. This study has trialled five main different data collection processes, aiming to find ‘what works’ for potential repeat research in future years: stratified survey of heritage asset owners and guardians web searches e-survey of interested organisations and others survey of local authorities in relation to unlawful development collation of other data. These innovative heritage crime data collection activities yielded an unprecedented volume of information, which have been processed into two main data types: responses from the stratified sample of heritage asset owners/guardians to a phone survey collated database of individual heritage crimes. The primary value of the crime database is in its provision of extra, more qualitative, information beyond that obtainable from the stratified survey. The empirical material is drawn on to answer in turn the specific questions that the study has addressed. How prevalent is heritage crime in different types of area? heritage assets located in central urban areas face the risks common to all buildings in such areas heritage crime risk does not vary very consistently between broad areas of the country in areas with few heritage assets (eg. many deprived areas), assets face higher heritage crime risk in-depth research is needed to assess further the true level of unauthorised developments to assets What type of heritage crime is most prevalent? criminal damage makes up the bulk of all heritage crime the risk of criminal damage to heritage assets is substantially greater in more deprived areas the frequency of metal theft also warrants separate consideration metal theft is higher where historic assets are few, and in particular in the North What types of heritage asset are most affected by crime? variation in overall heritage crime risk was slight between most heritage asset types criminal damage is the main heritage crime risk for Listed Buildings and in Conservation Areas damage by owners due to unauthorised changes is a non-trivial element of the total picture metal theft is not a great risk to buildings in Conservation Areas that are not individually designated Scheduled Monuments are different to other heritage assets, in being at rather low risk of metal theft and criminal damage, and higher risk of other crime such as unauthorised metal detecting What type of heritage crime most affects each type of heritage asset? criminal damage is the main heritage crime risk for all use types of heritage assets except farms religious buildings stand out with their higher risk of criminal damage and, most notably, metal theft some of the evidence points to a higher risk for buildings that are unoccupied for more of the time otherwise the risk ‘profile’ by heritage crime types and ASB does not vary greatly by building usage What can be said on the extent of different types of impact of heritage crime? variation in risk of higher impact crime was slight between most heritage asset types criminal damage is the main risk leading to impact on all asset types arson is infrequent but can have huge monetary costs and damaging impacts on the fabric metal theft can also have significant ‘secondary’ effects beyond the direct cost of replacement evidence on BT Listed call boxes shows repair costs per incident varying little by area, but incidence varies in the ways seen before (higher in more urban, more deprived and less historic areas) What is known about links between socio-economic trends and recent trends in heritage crime? the trend itself remains uncertain little is confidently known of factors ‘driving’ heritage crime trends generally it appears that metal theft is a growing problem, and this is linkable to wholesale metal price trends overall acquisitive crime levels may have changed little, but a ‘diversion‘ to metal theft may also mean a ‘diversion’ towards heritage crime because of the amount of lead on historic roofs The final part of the report draws together observations and recommendations about ‘what worked’ in the data collection processes, and then sketches a small number of reflections on the data needed by those tackling heritage crime, and some further research which may assist them. Is it possible to instigate common practices in heritage crime data recording? The most directly relevant enhancement of official crime recording could be the introduction of a specific question as to whether a heritage asset was involved in the crime. Agreed terminology allows keyword searches to be efficient and to yield robust results, and a new terminology has been devised for the collated crimes database of this study. An ideal development would be for all future British Crime Surveys to include an indicator of the heritage status (or otherwise) of the location of each respondent. Are there implications from the study for broader issues related to heritage crime? The most fundamental question – which has not been addressed by this study – is whether “heritage crime” should be specifically recognised in law, rather than be covered either directly or in part by a large number of separate strands of legislation. Should there be continual or repeated heritage crime data collection? Several of the sources accessed in this study are, for various reasons, unlikely to produce statistical data from which robust estimates of national prevalence can be produced. Heritage Asset owners and guardians 6 could be re-surveyed on a regular basis, but other data gathering efforts would incur lower cost and could be a valuable way of keeping aware of emerging concern. There are also non-statistical reasons for further information gathering, where this is a focus of partnership building activities. Are there other opportunities for improving intelligence on heritage crime? Police Forces have the technical skills required to perform analysis on data they already have, but this would be helped if heritage asset owners and guardians were to consistently report incidents: this study found that 1 in 3 of the heritage crimes recalled in the survey had not been reported. Should there be other heritage crime research studies following up points raised here? Crimes on heritage assets in a marine environment will only be adequately researched by a separate dedicated study. Another type of heritage crime requiring a specific study would be the use of metal detectors for illegal activities detrimental to archaeology. The study also leads to the suggestion of research on the scale of unlawful developments to heritage assets by their owners or guardians. Finally there is the possibility of comparative research to assess whether the patterns in heritage crime found in this study are limited to England, although such studies would need to take into account the variations in legislation between different jurisdictions in the British Isles. Details: Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK; Newcastle University, 2012. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 19, 2012 at: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/imported-docs/p-t/researchpaper.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/imported-docs/p-t/researchpaper.pdf Shelf Number: 125679 Keywords: AntiquitiesAntisocial BehaviorArt CrimeCultural PropertyHeritage Crime (U.K.)Property Crimes |
Author: Johansson, Hanna Sofia Title: Preventing Illegal Export of Cultural Objects: Summary Summary: Most countries have adopted legislation for protecting against the export of certain older cultural objects. There are also common EU regulations regarding the export of such objects to a third country. In Sweden, export has been regulated by law since the beginning of the 1920’s. A person who unlawfully takes out a protected object from the country risks being sentenced for up to six years in prison for smuggling. The purpose behind the legislation is that objects that are considered important to the cultural heritage should remain within the country. Cultural heritage is considered important because it contributes to the creation of a common identity. Additionally, it is seen as especially valuable because a cultural heritage that is lost cannot be compensated for financially. Objects that are encompassed by the export regulations include old paintings, drawings, incunabula2, books, archives and other antiques. Examples of objects included in the “other antiques” category are the cabinet on the front cover and the mirror sconce on the back cover. In general, the export restrictions apply to cultural objects that are older than 100 years. For many objects, there are also value limits that need to be reached in order for the export regulations to apply. There is no value limit for old furniture, and the age limit is fixed. This means that all furniture manufactured before 1860 requires a permit for export. Details: Stockholm: The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå), 2012. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2013 at: http://www.bra.se/download/18.4dfe0028139b9a0cf4080001495/2012_10_preventing_illegal_export_of_cultural_objects_summary.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Sweden URL: http://www.bra.se/download/18.4dfe0028139b9a0cf4080001495/2012_10_preventing_illegal_export_of_cultural_objects_summary.pdf Shelf Number: 128298 Keywords: AntiquitiesArt CrimeCultural PropertyHeritage Crime (Sweden)Property Crimes |
Author: Wylly, Marion Johnston Title: Motives of Art Theft: A Social Contextual Perspective of Value Summary: This study utilizes a sociological contextual examination of the value of art in order to examine the relationship between the value of art and art theft. The over-riding research question of this study addresses: What is the relationship between the value of art and art theft? In order to explore this question, the study will further examine three additional research questions. First, what determines the value of art? Does this value affect motive? If so, how? Second, what is, if any, the co-evolutionary relationship between the value placed on an artwork and art crime? Third, how do policies and procedures established to protect artworks also affect the value of art? This exploratory and descriptive study examines the dualism of value and motive relative to the context of art and art theft through an inductive grounded theory design. The primary means for gathering data will incorporate content analysis and a series of open-ended systematic qualitative interviews. The findings of this study contribute to the overall knowledge of art theft and illicit art trade. It will provide a base of information for future studies, and aid in the development of theories about art crimes. The data will also provide information to stakeholders so that they may actively influence changes in procedures and policy implementation as a prevention of art crimes. Details: Florida State University, 2014. 152p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed December 14, 2016 at: http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:185344/datastream/PDF/view Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:185344/datastream/PDF/view Shelf Number: 140440 Keywords: Art CrimeArt Theft Illicit Art Trade |