Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Knowledge Management, Arts, and Humanities pp 147–169Cite as

Management of Archaeological Information and Knowledge in Digital Environment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning ((IAKM,volume 7))

Abstract

Digital technologies have had a major impact on archaeological information work. This chapter provides insights into how archaeological information and knowledge are managed in the digital environment, what major challenges can be identified in that particular domain and what insights for information and knowledge management research and practice can be drawn from a better understanding of archaeological information work. From the perspective of information and knowledge management research and practice, a closer look at archaeological work as a domain can, for instance, inform the development of strategies for managing temporal and epistemological diversity. Major challenges in the management of archaeological information and knowledge include how to address diverse perspectives and needs of different stakeholders and how to better manage social information processes and socially mediated information in addition to formal data and documentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almeida, M. V., & Soares, A. L. (2014). Knowledge sharing in project-based organizations: Overcoming the informational limbo. International Journal of Information Management, 34(6), 770–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barceló, J. (2002). Archaeological thinking: Between space and time. Archeologia e Calcolatori, 13, 237–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, J. C. (2006). Archaeology as the investigation of contexts of humanity. In D. Papaconstantinou (Ed.), Deconstructing context: A critical approach to archaeological practice (pp. 194–211). Oxford: Oxbow Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benardou, A., Champion, E., Dallas, C., & Hughes, L. M. (2018). Introduction: A critique of digital practices and research infrastructures. In A. Benardou, E. Champion, C. Dallas, & L. M. Hughes (Eds.), Cultural heritage infrastructures in digital humanities. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blandford, A., & Attfield, S. (2010). Interacting with information. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloemers, T. (2010a). Introduction: Sharing knowledge – Stories, maps and design. In T. Bloemers, H. Kars, & A. van der Valk (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension (pp. 521–528). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloemers, T. (2010b). The pdl/bbo research programme analysed from the perspective of knowledge management. In T. Bloemers, H. Kars, & A. van der Valk (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson, L. (2015). Grey literature – Grey sources? Nuancing the view on professional documentation: The case of Swedish archaeology. Journal of Documentation, 71(6), 1158–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson, L., & Huvila, I. (2019). Contract archaeology. In L. Börjesson & I. Huvila (Eds.), Research outside the academy: Professional knowledge-making in the digital age (pp. 107–122). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson, L., Dell’Unto, N., Huvila, I., Larsson, C., Löwenborg, D., Petersson, B., & Stenborg, P. (2016). A neo-documentalist lens for exploring the premises of disciplinary knowledge making. Proceedings from the Document Academy, 3(1), Article 5. http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/docam/vol3/iss1/5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braccini, A. M., & Federici, T. (2010). An IS for archaeological finds management as a platform for knowledge management: The ArcheoTRAC case. VINE, 40(2), 136–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, S. A. (2016). A provenance research study of archaeological curation. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, S. (2012). Community archaeology as knowledge management: Reflections from Uneapa Island, Papua New Guinea. Public Archaeology, 11(1), 26–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byström, K., Ruthven, I., & Heinström, J. (2017). Work and information: Which workplace models still work in modern digital workplaces? Information Research, 22(1), Paper 1651. http://www.informationr.net/ir/22-1/colis/colis1651.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, M. O. H. (2009). Archaeological investigation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, M., Gaydarska, B., & Monton-Subias, S. (Eds.). (2015). Field archaeology from around the world: Ideas and approaches. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copplestone, T., & Dunne, D. (2017). Digital media, creativity, narrative structure and heritage. Internet Archaeology, 44. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.44.2

  • COST-ARKWORK. (2016–2020). COST action CA15201 archaeological practices and knowledge work in the digital environment. http://www.cost.eu/COST_Actions/ca/CA15201

  • Dallas, C. (2015). Jean-Claude Gardin on archaeological data, representation and knowledge: Implications for digital archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 23(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, P. T., & Evans, T. L. (2006). Introduction: Archaeological theory and digital pasts. In T. L. Evans & P. T. Daly (Eds.), Digital archaeology: Bridging method and theory (pp. 2–7). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Roo, B., Bourgeois, J., & De Maeyer, P. (2016). Information flows as bases for archaeology-specific geodata infrastructures: An exploratory study in flanders. JASIST, 67(8), 1928–1942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demoule, J.-P. (2016). Preventive archaeology: Scientific research or commercial activity? In P. Novaković, M. Horňák, M. P. Guermandi, H. Stäuble, P. Depaep, & J.-P. Demoule (Eds.), Recent developments in preventive archaeology in Europe: Proceedings of the 22nd EAA Meeting in Vilnius, 2016 (pp. 9–19). Ljubljana: Ljubljana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorrell, P. G. (1994). Photography in archaeology and conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, S. (2006). ECAI – E-Science Methods in Archaeology: Development, Support and Infrastructure in the UK. Abstract of a paper presented in the 34th Annual Meeting and Conference of Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology CAA2006, Fargo, April 18–21, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, C., & Grossner, K. (2016). Representing the archaeological process at Çatalhöyük in a living archive. In I. Hodder & A. Marciniak (Eds.), Assembling Çatalhöyük (pp. 13–24). Leeds: Maney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fear, K. (2010). User understanding of metadata in digital image collections: Or, what exactly do you mean by “coverage”? The American Archivist, 73(1), 26–60. http://archivists.metapress.com/content/J00044LR77415551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flexner, J. L. (2016). Dark and bright futures for museum archaeology. Museum Worlds, 4(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallay, A. (2018). L’archéologie demain 1986-2016: Quoi de neuf? In S. Léglise, F. Mathias, & J. Ripoche (Eds.), L’archéologie, science plurielle (p. 00000). Paris: Éditions de la Sorbonne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardin, J.-C. (1971). Archaeology and computers: New perspectives. International Social Science Journal, 23(2), 189–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardin, J.-C. (1980). Archaeological constructs: An aspect of theoretical archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardin, J.-C. (1999a). Archéologie, formalisation et sciences sociales. Sociologie et sociétés, 31(1), 119–127. http://www.erudit.org/revue/socsoc/1999/v31/n1/001282ar.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardin, J.-C. (1999b). Calcul et narrative dans les publications archéologiques. Archeologia e calcolatori, 10, 63–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardin, J.-C. (2003). Archaeological discourse, conceptual modelling and digitalisation: An interim report of the logicist program. In M. Doerr & A. Sarris (Eds.), CAA 2002 The digital heritage of archaeology. Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. Proceedings of the 30th Conference, Heraklion, Crete, April 2002 (pp. 5–11). Athens: Archive of Monuments and Publications, Hellenic Ministry of Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geser, G. (2016). WP15 study: Towards a web of archaeological linked open data. Salzburg: ARIADNE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geser, G., & Selhofer, H. (2014). D2.1 first report on users Ńeeds. tech. rep. Prato: ARIADNE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S., & Perrotta, M. (2013). Doing by inventing the way of doing: Formativeness as the linkage of meaning and matter. In How Matter Matters (pp. 227–259). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gilissen, V., & Hollander, H. (2017). Archiving the past while keeping up with the times. Studies in Digital Heritage, 1(2), 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, G. (2017). Contract archaeology, social media and the unintended collaboration with the public – Experiences from Motala, Sweden. Internet Archaeology, 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson, A., & Magnusson Staaf, B. (2001). Rapport om rapporter – en diskussion kring kvalitetsbedömningar av arkeologiska rapporter. Report 2001 (p. 3). Stockholm: RAÄ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henninger, M. (2018). From mud to the museum: Metadata challenges in archaeology. Journal of Information Science, 44(5), 658–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2000). Towards reflexive method in archaeology: the example at Çatalhöyük. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Högberg, A., & Holtorf, C. (2013). Heritage futures and the future of heritage. In S. Bergerbrant & S. Sabatini (Eds.), Counterpoint: essays in archaeology and heritage studies in honour of Professor Kristian Kristiansen, no. 2508 in BAR international series (pp. 739–746). Oxford: Archaeopress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Högberg, A., Holtorf, C., May, S., & Wollentz, G. (2017). No future in archaeological heritage management? World Archaeology, 49(5), 639–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtorf, C. (2012). Kritische Archäologie ist angewandte Archäologie. Forum Kritische Archäologie, 1, 100–103. http://www.kritischearchaeologie.de/fka/article/view/14

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggett, J. (2012). Promise and paradox: Accessing open data in archaeology. In C. Mills, M. Pidd, & E. Ward (Eds.), Proceedings of the Digital Humanities Congress (p. 2012). Sheffield: Humanities Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggett, J. (2016). Digital haystacks: Open data and the transformation of archaeological knowledge. In A. T. Wilson & B. Edwards (Eds.), Open source archaeology, ethics and practice (pp. 6–29). Berlin: de Gruyter Open.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2006). The ecology of information work – A case study of bridging archaeological work and virtual reality based knowledge organisation. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:951-765-337-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2009). Ecological framework of information interactions and information infrastructures. Journal of Information Science, 35(6), 695–708. http://jis.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/0165551509336705v1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2011). The politics of boundary objects: hegemonic interventions and the making of a document. JASIST, 62(12), 2528–2539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2012a). Authorship and documentary boundary objects. In 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS) (pp. 1636–1645). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2012b). Being formal and flexible: Semantic Wiki as an archaeological e-Science infrastructure. In M. Zhou, I. Romanowska, Z. Wu, P. Xu, & P. Verhagen (Eds.), Revive the past: Proceeding of the 39th Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Beijing, 12–16 April 2011 (pp. 186–197). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. http://dare.uva.nl/aup/nl/record/412958

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2012c). Information services and digital literacy: In search of the boundaries of knowing. Oxford: Chandos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2013). How a museum knows? Structures, work roles, and infrastructures of information work. JASIST, 64(7), 1375–1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2014a). Archaeologists and their information sources. In I. Huvila (Ed.), Perspectives to archaeological information in the digital society (pp. 25–54). Uppsala: Department of ALM, Uppsala University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2014b). Be informed of your information. Current Swedish Archaeology, 22, 48–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2014c). Towards information leadership. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(6), 663–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2016a). Awkwardness of becoming a boundary object: Mangle and materialities of reports, documentation data and the archaeological work. The Information Society, 32(4), 280–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2016b). ‘If we just knew who should do it’, or the social organization of the archiving of archaeology in Sweden. Information Research, 21(2), Paper 713. http://www.informationr.net/ir/21-2/paper713.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2017a). Archaeology of no names? The social productivity of anonymity in the archaeological information process. ephemera, 17(2), 351–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2017b). Land developers and archaeological information. Open Information Science, 1(1), 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (Ed.). (2018a). Archaeology and archaeological information in the digital society. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2018b). Ecology of archaeological information work. In I. Huvila (Ed.), Archaeology and archaeological information in the digital society (pp. 121–141). London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2018c). Putting to (information) work: A Stengersian perspective on how information technologies and people influence information practices. The Information Society, 34(4), 229–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2019). How knowing changes. In L. Börjesson & I. Huvila (Eds.), Research outside the academy: Professional knowledge-making in the digital age (pp. 155–170). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I., & Huggett, J. (2018). Archaeological practices, knowledge work and digitalisation. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1), 88–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrahi, M. H., & Thomson, L. (2017). The interplay between information practices and information context: The case of mobile knowledge workers. JASIST, 68(5), 1073–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, S., Richards, J., Ciravegna, F., Waller, S., Chapman, S., & Zhang, Z. (2009). The archaeotools project: Faceted classification and natural language processing in an archaeological context. Philosophical Transactions. Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, 367(1897), 2507. http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1897/2507.abstract

    Google Scholar 

  • Kansa, S. W., & Deblauwe, F. (2011). User-generated content in zooarchaeology: Exploring the “middle space” of scholarly communication. In E. C. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, & E. Watrall (Eds.), Archaeology 2.0: New approaches to communication and collaboration (pp. 185–206). Los Angeles, CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UC Los Angeles.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kansa, E., & Kansa, S. (2011). Toward a do-it-yourself cyberinfrastructure: Open data, incentives, and reducing costs and complexities of data sharing. In E. C. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, & E. Watrall (Eds.), Archaeology 2.0: New approaches to communication and collaboration (pp. 57–91). Los Angeles, CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UC Los Angeles.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kansa, E. C., Kansa, S. W., & Watrall, E. (2011). Archaeology 2.0: New approaches to communication and collaboration. Los Angeles, CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UC Los Angeles.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Karmacharya, A., Cruz, C., Boochs, F., & Marzani, F. (2008). Managing knowledge for spatial data – A case study with industrial archaeological findings. In Paper presented at digital heritage in the new knowledge environment: Shared spaces & open paths to cultural content, Athens, Greece. http://i3mainz.hs-mainz.de/sites/default/files/public/data/ManagingKnowledge.pdf

  • Khazraee, E., & Gasson, S. (2015). Epistemic objects and embeddedness: Knowledge construction and narratives in research networks of practice. The Information Society, 31(2), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2015.998104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khazraee, E., & Khoo, M. (2011). Practice-based ontologies: A new approach to address the challenges of ontology and knowledge representation in history and archaeology. In E. Garcia-Barriocanal, Z. Cebeci, M. C. Okur, & A. Öztürk (Eds.), Proceedings of 5th International Conference, MTSR 2011, Izmir, Turkey, October 12–14, 2011. (pp. 375–386). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24731-6_38

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilbride, W. (2016). Saving the bits: Digital humanities forever? In S. Schreibman, R. G. Siemens, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A new companion to digital humanities (pp. 408–419). West Sussex: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilfeather, E., McAuley, J., Corns, A., & McHugh, O. (2003). An ontological application for archaeological narratives. In Proceedings of 14th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 2003. (pp. 110–114). New York: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintigh, K. (2006). The promise and challenge of archaeological data integration. American Antiquity, 71(3), 567–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, S., & Jablonka, P. (2001). Virtual archaeology: VR based knowledge management and marketing in archaeology first results – Next steps. In VAST ‘01: Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Virtual Reality, Archeology, and Cultural Heritage (pp. 235–240). New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • KML. (1988). Kulturminneslagen [Swedish Cultural Heritage Act] 1988 (p. 950).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochan, J. (2018). Science as social existence: Heidegger and the sociology of scientific knowledge. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers. http://books.openedition.org/obp/5036

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristiansen, K. (2014). What is in a paradigm? Reply to comments. Current Swedish Archaeology, 22, 65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laužikas, R., Dallas, C., Thomas, S., Kelpšienė, I., Huvila, I., Luengo, P., Nobre, H., Toumpouri, M., & Vaitkevičius, V. (2018). Archaeological knowledge production and global communities: Boundaries and structure of the field. Open Archaeology, 4(1), 350–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Léglise, S., Mathias, F., & Ripoche, J. (Eds.). (2018). L’archéologie, science plurielle. Paris: Éditions de la Sorbonne. http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/7036

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, S., & Liew, C. L. (2011). Metadata quality and interoperability of GLAM digital images. ASLIB Proceedings, 63(5), 484–498. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012531111164978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, G. (2003). Using computers in archaeology: Towards virtual pasts. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, G. (2010). Time and the archaeological archive. Rethinking History, 14(3), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2010.482789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, G. (2012). Understanding the archaeological record. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marila, M. (2018). Arkeologialla on spekulatiivinen vastuu [archaeology has a speculative responsibility]. Muinaistutkija, 2, 52–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquardt, W. H., Montet-White, A., & Scholtz, S. C. (1982). Resolving the crisis in archaeological collections curation. American Antiquity, 47(2), 409–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathias, F., Léglise, S., & Ripoche, J. (2018). Conclusion. In L’archéologie: Science plurielle. Paris: Éditions de la Sorbonne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meghini, C., Scopigno, R., Richards, J., Wright, H., Geser, G., Cuy, S., Fihn, J., Fanini, B., Hollander, H., Niccolucci, F., Felicetti, A., Ronzino, P., Nurra, F., Papatheodorou, C., Gavrilis, D., Theodoridou, M., Doerr, M., Tudhope, D., Binding, C., & Vlachidis, A. (2017). Ariadne: A research infrastructure for archaeology. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 10(3), 18:1–18:27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, H., & Baker, M. (2009). The VERA information environments. In 37th Annual Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA) Conference, Williamsburg, Virginia. http://www.caa2009.org/articles/Mills_Contribution277_a.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Missikoff, O. (2004). Ontologies as a reference framework for the management of knowledge in the archaeological domain. In Enter the past. Proceedings of the 30th CAA conference held in Vienna, Austria, April 2003, no. 1227 in British Archaeological Reports – International Series (pp. 35–38). Oxford: Archaeopress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C. L. (2012). Emancipatory digital archaeology. Ph.D. thesis. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscati, P. (2013). Jean-Claude Gardin (Parigi 1925-2013). Dalla meccanografica all’informatica archeologica. Archeologia e Calcolatori, 24, 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscati, P. (2016). Jean-claude gardin and the evolution of archaeological computing. Les Nouvelles de l’archéologie, 144, 10–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, S., Robertson, M., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2009). Managing knowledge work and innovation (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. (2011). On the record: The philosophy of recording. Internet Archaeology, 29. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue29/tag_index.html

  • Ní Chíobháin Enqvist, D. (2018). Digital maritime sights: Digital visual documentation and communicationin Scandinavian contract maritime archaeology. Lic. thesis. Linnaeus University, Kalmar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niven, K., & Richards, J. D. (2017). The storage and long-term preservation of 3d data. In D. Errickson & T. Thompson (Eds.), Human remains: Another dimension: The application of imaging to the study of human remains (pp. 175–184). London: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, B. (2012). Archaeology the discipline of things. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, M. (2015). Making sense of the past: The information practices of field archaeologists. In Presentation at the i3 Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, M. (2016). Making sense of the past: The embodied information practices of field archaeologists. Journal of Information Science, 42(3), 410–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Östling, J., Sandmo, E., Heidenblatt, D. L., Hammar, A. N., & Nordberg, K. H. (Eds.). (2018). Circulation of knowledge explorations in the history of knowledge. Lund: Nordic Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrik, L. (1985). Is there an archaeological record? Advances in archaeological method and theory, 8, 27–62.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pavel, C. (2010). Describing and interpreting the past: European and American approaches to the written record of the excavation. Bucuresti: Editura Universitatii din Bucuresti.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, S. (2018). Why are heritage interpreters voiceless at the trowel’s edge? a plea for rewriting the archaeological workflow. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 6(03), 212–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RAÄ. (2015a). Digital arkeologisk process – DAP. Samordnad information om fornminnen. Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • RAÄ. (2015b). Uppdragsarkeologi: Rapportering, förmedling och arkeologiskt dokumentationsmaterial. Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, J. D. (2002). Digital preservation and access. European Journal of Archaeology, 5(3), 343–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, J. (2016). Long-term data preservation and re-use: The work of the archaeology data service. In K. May (Ed.), Digital archaeological heritage – Proceedings of the International Conference Brighton, UK, 17–19 March, 2016 (pp. 85–87). Namur: Europae Archaeologia Consilium (EAC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Riksantikvarieämbetet. (2016). Fyndprocessen – från arkeologiska undersökare till mottagande museum med förslag för en mer digital process. Tech. rep., Visby.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, I. A., & Cochrane, A. (Eds.). (2014). Art and archaeology: Collaborations, conversations, criticism. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlitz, M. (2007). Archaeological photography. In M. R. Peres (Ed.), The focal encyclopedia of photography (pp. 506–508). New York: Focal Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, J. (2010). Archaeology and contemporary society: Introduction. World Archaeology, 42(3), 325–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanks, M., & McGuire, R. H. (1996). The craft of archaeology. American Antiquity, 61(1), 75–88. http://www.jstor.org/stable/282303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanco, F., Battiato, S., & Gallo, G. (2017). Digital imaging for cultural heritage preservation: Analysis, restoration, and reconstruction of ancient artworks. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L. (2010). Ceci n’est pas un objet-frontiére! Réflexions sur l’origine d’un concept. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, 4(1), 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stengers, I. (2005). Introductory notes on an ecology of practices. Cultural Studies Review, 11(1), 183–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trigger, B. G. (1989). A history of archaeological thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trigger, B. G. (2006). A history of archaeological thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Uotila, K., & Huvila, I. (2006). The education of little archaeologist? Reflections on the digital education and training of archaeological professionals. In Proceedings of the International Congress Kulturelles Erbe und Neue Technologien Workshop-10 Archäologie und Computer. Wien: Magistrat der Stadt Wien, MA 7 – Referat Kulturelles Erbe - Stadtarchäologie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valtolina, S., Barricelli, B. R., & Dittrich, Y. (2012). Participatory knowledge-management design: A semiotic approach. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 23(2), 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valtolina, S., Barricelli, B. R., Gianni, G. B., & Bortolotto, S. (2013). Archmatrix: Knowledge management and visual analytics for archaeologists. In S. Yamamoto (Ed.), Human interface and the management of information. Information and interaction for learning, culture, collaboration and business (pp. 258–266). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Noort, R. (2013). Climate change archaeology: Building resilience from research in the world’s coastal wetlands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van der Linde, S. J., van den Dries, M. H., & Wait, G. (2018). Putting the soul into archaeology - integrating interpretation into practice. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 6(3), 181–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Valk, A. (2010). Introduction: Sharing knowledge – stories, maps and design. In T. Bloemers, H. Kars, & A. van der Valk (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension (pp. 365–385). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Valkenburgh, P., Silva, L. O. G., Repetti-Ludlow, C., Gardner, J., Crook, J., & Ballsun-Stanton, B. (2018). Mobilization as mediation: Implementing a tablet-based recording system for ceramic classification. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 6(4), 342–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vatanen, I. (2005). Affordances and constraints in knowledge organization. In S. Hawamdeh (Ed.), Knowledge management: Nurturing culture, innovation and technology. Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Knowledge Management (pp. 315–321). Singapore: World Scientific.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vlachidis, A., Binding, C., Tudhope, D., & May, K. (2010). Excavating grey literature: A case study on the rich indexing of archaeological documents via natural language-processing techniques and knowledge-based resources. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 62(4–5), 466–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, B. L. (2012). Curation as research. A case study in orphaned and underreported archaeological collections. Archaeological Dialogues, 19(2), 145–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallrodt, J. (2016). Why paperless: Technology and changes in archaeological practice, 1996–2016. In D. B. Counts, E. W. Averett, & J. M. Gordon (Eds.), Mobilizing the past for a digital future: The potential of digital archaeology (pp. 33–50). Grand Forks, ND: Digital Press at the University of North Dakota. http://dc.uwm.edu/arthist_mobilizingthepast/

    Google Scholar 

  • Warwick, C., Fisher, C., Terras, M., Baker, M., Clarke, A., Fulford, M., Grove, M., O’Riordan, E., & Rains, M. (2009). iTrench: A study of user reactions to the use of information technology in field archaeology. Lit Linguist Computing, 24(2), 211–223. http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/24/2/211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wattrall, E. (2011). iAKS: A web 2.0 archaeological knowledge management system. In E. C. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, & E. Watrall (Eds.), Archaeology 2.0: New approaches to communication and collaboration (pp. 171–183). Los Angeles, CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UC Los Angeles.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wendrich, W. (2012). Archaeology and apprenticeship: Body knowledge, identity, and communities of practice. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahlouth, I. M. L. V., & de Paiva, R. O. (2012). Vestigios arqueologicos como fontes de informacao: Segredos do passado transcritos em suportes primitivos [Archaeological remains as sources of information: Secrets of the past transcribed in primitive media]. Biblionline, 8(2), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaslavsky, I., Burton, M. M., & Levy, T. E. (2017). A new approach to online visual analysis and sharing of archaeological surveys and image collections. In M. L. Vincent, V. M. López-Menchero Bendicho, M. Ioannides, & T. E. Levy (Eds.), Heritage and archaeology in the digital age: Acquisition, curation, and dissemination of spatial cultural heritage data (pp. 133–150). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zubrow, E. B. W. (2006). Digital archaeology: A historical context. In T. L. Evans & P. T. Daly (Eds.), Digital archaeology: Bridging method and theory (pp. 8–26). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of ALM, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Isto Huvila

Authors
  1. Isto Huvila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Management & InfoTech, International Burch University, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Meliha Handzic

  2. Department of European and Mediterranean Cultures, Environment and Cultural Heritage (DICEM), University of Basilicata, Matera, Italy

    Daniela Carlucci

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huvila, I. (2019). Management of Archaeological Information and Knowledge in Digital Environment. In: Handzic, M., Carlucci, D. (eds) Knowledge Management, Arts, and Humanities. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10922-6_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation