China: Domestic Archaeological Heritage Management Law

  • Amanda Kate Maus Stephen
Living reference work entry


China is commonly referred to as a source country, meaning it is rich in cultural art and property, but poor in terms of economic resources. Many source countries face intense demand for their cultural relics, resulting in increased illicit excavation. Unfortunately, the impact of illicit excavation on archaeology can be devastating. When items are excavated without regard for the integrity of the original site, much information about the item, its use, and its historical context can be lost (He Shuzhong 2001). With more than 7000 years of cultural history, the People’s Republic of China has an immense number of important archaeological sites and a growing need for help preserving those sites.

Illicit excavation is not the only archaeological problem China faces. Interest in China’s history fuels tourism demands, as well. In the past, it was not uncommon for local towns or provinces to move archaeological sites or structures in their entirety to places more easily...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Baskin, Bernard I.W. 2009. Historical heist: An economic argument against embargoing Chinese cultural property. Washington University Global Studies Law Review 8: 107–138.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, Jonathan S. 2016. Introduction to the cultural heritage issue. Chinese Law and Government 48: 179–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. CBS News. China sentences to death ancient tomb robbers, 14 May 2010. Available at Accessed 11 Jan 2012.
  4. China Daily. China exempts 13 crimes from death penalty, 25 February 2011. Available at Accessed 7 Oct 2017.
  5. China Daily. 30 sentenced in record relics theft case in Liaoning, 5 January 2016. Available at Accessed 7 Oct 2017.
  6. China Legal Information Center. China to better protect cultural relics, 25 September 2017. Available at Accessed 4 Oct 2017.
  7. He Shuzhong. 2001. Trade in illicit antiquities: The destruction of the world’s archaeological heritage. In Illicit excavation in contemporary China, ed. N. Brodie, J. Doole, and C. Renfrew, 19–24. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
  8. Hoffman, Matthew R. 2010. Cultural pragmatism: A new approach to the international movement of antiquities. Iowa Law Review 95: 665–694.Google Scholar
  9. Huo, Zhengxin. 2015. Legal protection of cultural heritage in China: A challenge to keep history alive. International Journal of Cultural Policy 22: 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Marton, Autumn L. 2009. On rabbits, rats and low-hanging fruit: Rethinking the impact of international agreements on Chan’s domestic cultural property protection. Columbia Journal of Asian Law 23: 217–239.Google Scholar
  11. Maus, Amanda K. 2009. Safeguarding China’s cultural history: Proposed amendments to the cultural relics law on the protection of cultural relics. Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal 18: 405–431.Google Scholar
  12. Murphy, N. 2009. Establishing the mandate of heaven through the protection of cultural relics. Orientations 40: 129–130.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amanda Kate Maus StephenJuris Doctor KenmoreUSA
  2. 2.School of ManagementCity University of SeattleSeattleUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Angela Labrador
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstAmherstUSA