Working with Indigenous Site Monitors and Tribal IRBs

IF 1.6 2区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Advances in Archaeological Practice Pub Date : 2023-04-24 DOI:10.1017/aap.2023.2
Addison P. Kimmel, Steven A. Katz, M. Lewis, E. Wilk
{"title":"Working with Indigenous Site Monitors and Tribal IRBs","authors":"Addison P. Kimmel, Steven A. Katz, M. Lewis, E. Wilk","doi":"10.1017/aap.2023.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Archaeologists have an obligation to conduct research that is relevant and responsive to the desires, interests, values, and concerns of Indigenous descendant communities. Current best practices for collaborative, community-based archaeologies emphasize long-term engagement and “full collaboration,” including the coproduction of knowledge and total stakeholder involvement. The present-day structures and demands of archaeology—especially in CRM and graduate student research contexts—can serve to make such fully collaborative work difficult, if not impossible. Oftentimes, these difficulties result in a complete abdication of collaboration or even consultation beyond the bare minimum required by law. However, professional archaeologists must strive in all instances to work alongside Native communities in respectful, responsive, and mutually beneficial ways even if this work may often fall short of the loftiest ideal. In this article, the authors present two case studies in collaboration from recent projects conducted in the North American midcontinent. These case studies clearly demonstrate how tribal fieldwork monitoring, working with tribal institutional review boards (IRBs), and other related forms of “imperfect” collaboration can still help move us toward a more ethical, inclusive, and respectful future archaeology.","PeriodicalId":7231,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Archaeological Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":"224 - 231"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Archaeological Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/aap.2023.2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Archaeologists have an obligation to conduct research that is relevant and responsive to the desires, interests, values, and concerns of Indigenous descendant communities. Current best practices for collaborative, community-based archaeologies emphasize long-term engagement and “full collaboration,” including the coproduction of knowledge and total stakeholder involvement. The present-day structures and demands of archaeology—especially in CRM and graduate student research contexts—can serve to make such fully collaborative work difficult, if not impossible. Oftentimes, these difficulties result in a complete abdication of collaboration or even consultation beyond the bare minimum required by law. However, professional archaeologists must strive in all instances to work alongside Native communities in respectful, responsive, and mutually beneficial ways even if this work may often fall short of the loftiest ideal. In this article, the authors present two case studies in collaboration from recent projects conducted in the North American midcontinent. These case studies clearly demonstrate how tribal fieldwork monitoring, working with tribal institutional review boards (IRBs), and other related forms of “imperfect” collaboration can still help move us toward a more ethical, inclusive, and respectful future archaeology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与土著站点监督员和部落irb合作
考古学家有义务进行与土著后裔社区的愿望、兴趣、价值观和关切相关的研究。目前以协作为基础的考古学的最佳实践强调长期参与和“充分合作”,包括知识的共同生产和利益相关者的全面参与。当今考古学的结构和需求——尤其是在CRM和研究生研究的背景下——可能会使这种完全合作的工作变得困难,如果不是不可能的话。通常,这些困难导致完全放弃合作,甚至超出法律要求的最低限度。然而,专业考古学家在任何情况下都必须努力以尊重、回应和互利的方式与土著社区合作,即使这项工作可能往往达不到最崇高的理想。在这篇文章中,作者介绍了最近在北美大陆中部进行的项目合作的两个案例研究。这些案例研究清楚地表明,部落实地考察监测、与部落机构审查委员会(irb)合作以及其他相关形式的“不完美”合作,仍然可以帮助我们走向一个更有道德、更包容、更尊重的未来考古学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
21.40%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Settlement Selection and Inequality in Video Games through an Anthropological Lens Regression with Archaeological Count Data A Paperless and 3D Workflow for Documenting Excavations at Insula I.14, Pompeii, Italy The Legality and Ethics of Web Scraping in Archaeology Experimental Archaeogaming
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1