Starting in the second half of the century, with decolonization, and thanks to the international recognition of indigenous minorities, there has been a widespread process of property claims and returns. These have occurred mainly towards postcolonial territories (between countries) and towards indigenous regions and minorities (within countries).[11] Cases of claim or return such as the Benin bronzes, the bust of Nefertiti, the Maori stuffed heads or Mokomokai, or the Montezuma plume are among the best known.

This process of heritage reclamation included an implicit criticism of nineteenth-century collecting itself. This began to be seen as a vertical process, one-way and closely linked to the colonial period:

In this way, since the end of the century, heritage, previously the “inalienable property of the nation,” began to be decentralized in favor of different cultural minorities. Successive changes in legislation would point in this direction. Indigenous communities began to be named custodians (heritage stakeholders) of a heritage that was recognized as theirs (Federal Law on Monuments of 1972 in Mexico, Protected Objects Act / Taonga Tuturu in 1975 or Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa Act of 1992 in New Zealand). Repatriations began to be carried out so that significant objects obtained through practices of dubious legality, or that had become politically incorrect today, returned to their places or cultures of origin (Natives Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the United States in 1990; Mataatua Declaration in New Zealand in 1993; Previous possessions, New Obligations in Australia 1993 or the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of indigenous peoples of 2007 in its article 31: “The right to maintain, control and develop their cultural heritage and traditional knowledge”). And very particularly, one of the main tools of heritage decolonization began to emerge across the globe: community museums, museums where indigenous communities could recover the production of meanings of their material culture through the exhibition—according to their values ​​and protocols—of their significant objects.

Community museums would be an answer to what to do with heritage after its return to the communities of origin, with objects that, at the same time that needed care and protection, returned to their original cultural context. In this regard, the concept of indigenous museum has been proposed.

Examples of indigenous museums would be the new New Zealand national museum Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, or many of the small community museums in Latin America.[14]​.

By architectural heritage we can understand a building, a group of buildings or the ruins of a building or a group of buildings that, over time, have acquired a value greater than that originally assigned and that goes far beyond the original commission. This value, as the ICOMOS chapters point out, can be cultural or emotional, physical or intangible, historical or technical.

The works of architecture that can be considered architectural heritage will then be those that, due to a multiplicity of reasons, not all of them technical or artistic, are considered that, without them, the environment where they are located would cease to be what it is.

It is the scene of the human past. If documents are the written memory of the past, architectural heritage is the constructed memory of history. Architectural heritage must be taken into account as a historical source, since it explains different aspects of human life: the imagination, society, technology, economy, daily life, etc.

The architectural heritage reveals the evolutionary character it had over time, its changes and permanences that it experienced. Various intervention works are carried out in heritage buildings to keep them in good condition. These can be simple maintenance and conservation works, or more drastic resolutions such as rehabilitation, restoration, restitution and reconstruction.

Considering that "all peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humanity" and that "respect for indigenous knowledge, cultures and traditional practices contribute to sustainable and equitable development and the management of whatever is appropriate of the environment", on September 13, 2007 the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted,[8]​ which establishes that "indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, their traditional knowledge"; "to practice and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs"; to practice and teach their own languages ​​and spiritual ceremonies; to maintain, protect and access their religious and cultural sites; to maintain their integrity as distinct peoples, their cultural values ​​and ethnic identity, as well as the restitution of the cultural and spiritual assets of which they have been stripped.[9]​.

This important declaration was preceded, since 1989, by Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization on indigenous and tribal peoples,[10]​ which determines the protection of "the social, cultural, religious and spiritual values ​​and practices" of indigenous peoples and defines "the special importance for the cultures of our territory and spiritual values ​​of the peoples concerned of their relationship with the lands or territories", as well as the importance of traditional economic activities for their culture. ILO Convention 169 determines that health services for indigenous people must be organized on a community basis, including prevention methods, curative practices and traditional medicines. Education programs "must cover their history, their knowledge and techniques, their value systems" and provisions must also be made to preserve indigenous languages.

Starting in the second half of the century, with decolonization, and thanks to the international recognition of indigenous minorities, there has been a widespread process of property claims and returns. These have occurred mainly towards postcolonial territories (between countries) and towards indigenous regions and minorities (within countries).[11] Cases of claim or return such as the Benin bronzes, the bust of Nefertiti, the Maori stuffed heads or Mokomokai, or the Montezuma plume are among the best known.

This process of heritage reclamation included an implicit criticism of nineteenth-century collecting itself. This began to be seen as a vertical process, one-way and closely linked to the colonial period:

In this way, since the end of the century, heritage, previously the “inalienable property of the nation,” began to be decentralized in favor of different cultural minorities. Successive changes in legislation would point in this direction. Indigenous communities began to be named custodians (heritage stakeholders) of a heritage that was recognized as theirs (Federal Law on Monuments of 1972 in Mexico, Protected Objects Act / Taonga Tuturu in 1975 or Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa Act of 1992 in New Zealand). Repatriations began to be carried out so that significant objects obtained through practices of dubious legality, or that had become politically incorrect today, returned to their places or cultures of origin (Natives Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the United States in 1990; Mataatua Declaration in New Zealand in 1993; Previous possessions, New Obligations in Australia 1993 or the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of indigenous peoples of 2007 in its article 31: “The right to maintain, control and develop their cultural heritage and traditional knowledge”). And very particularly, one of the main tools of heritage decolonization began to emerge across the globe: community museums, museums where indigenous communities could recover the production of meanings of their material culture through the exhibition—according to their values ​​and protocols—of their significant objects.

Community museums would be an answer to what to do with heritage after its return to the communities of origin, with objects that, at the same time that needed care and protection, returned to their original cultural context. In this regard, the concept of indigenous museum has been proposed.

Examples of indigenous museums would be the new New Zealand national museum Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, or many of the small community museums in Latin America.[14]​.

By architectural heritage we can understand a building, a group of buildings or the ruins of a building or a group of buildings that, over time, have acquired a value greater than that originally assigned and that goes far beyond the original commission. This value, as the ICOMOS chapters point out, can be cultural or emotional, physical or intangible, historical or technical.

The works of architecture that can be considered architectural heritage will then be those that, due to a multiplicity of reasons, not all of them technical or artistic, are considered that, without them, the environment where they are located would cease to be what it is.

It is the scene of the human past. If documents are the written memory of the past, architectural heritage is the constructed memory of history. Architectural heritage must be taken into account as a historical source, since it explains different aspects of human life: the imagination, society, technology, economy, daily life, etc.

The architectural heritage reveals the evolutionary character it had over time, its changes and permanences that it experienced. Various intervention works are carried out in heritage buildings to keep them in good condition. These can be simple maintenance and conservation works, or more drastic resolutions such as rehabilitation, restoration, restitution and reconstruction.