Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contract Archaeology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Research Outside The Academy

Abstract

The rapid expansion of contract archaeology as the primary sector of archaeological knowledge-making in many developed countries make it an illustrative example of which effects the organization and re-organization of a particular knowledge-producing sector affects the conditions for how knowledge can be made. The proliferation of contracted extra-mural work in different countries has shown the importance of adequate guidelines and careful consideration of how and what to regulate to reach desirable outcomes. In addition, contract archaeology provides insights into the difficulties of keeping together extra- and intra-mural knowledge-making enterprises even when they share the same outspoken objectives.

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

Access this chapter

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 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aitchison, K. (2009). After the ‘gold rush’: Global archaeology in 2009. World Archaeology, 41(4), 659–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitchison, K. (2015). Professional archaeology in the UK in 2015. Cultural Trends, 24(1), 11–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitchison, K., Alphas, E., Ameels, V., Bentz, M., Bors, C., Cella, E., et al. (2014). Discovering the archaeologists of Europe 2012–14: Transnational report. York: York Archaeological Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, C., Lagerlöf, A., & Skyllberg, E. (2010). Assessing and measuring: On quality in development-led archaeology (with comments and reply). Current Swedish Archaeology, 18, 11–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, A., & Hodder, I. (2003). Social practice, method, and some problems of field archaeology. American Antiquity, 68(3), 421–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bibby, D. (2013). Die arbeitsgruppe archaeological archives des europae archaeologiae consilium und das culture 2007–2013 project arches. eine kurze vorstellung. In S. Winghart (Ed.), Archäologie und Informationssysteme (pp. 115–117). Hameln: Niedersächsisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege.

    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. (2016). Research outside academia? An analysis of resources in extra-academic report writing. In Proceedings of the 2016 ASIS&T Annual Meeting, Copenhagen (pp. 1–10). http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301036.

  • Börjesson, L. (2017). Resources for scholarly documentation in professional service organizations. Ph.D. thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson, L., Dell’Unto, N., Huvila, I., Larsson, C., Löwenborg, D., Petersson, B., et al. (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.

  • Börjesson, L., Petersson, B., & Huvila, I. (2015). Information policy for (digital) information in archaeology: Current state and suggestions for development. Internet Archaeology, 40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, R. (2003). Seeing things: Perception, experience and the constraints of excavation. Journal of Social Archaeology, 3(2), 151–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S. (2002). Contract archaeology in Scotland. Antiquity, 76(293), 869–873.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, M. (1999). Field archaeology. In G. Barker (Ed.), Companion encyclopedia of archaeology (pp. 128–181). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleere, H. (1989). Archaeological heritage management in the modern world (Vol. 9). London: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumberpatch, C., & Blinkhorn, P. (2001). Clients, contractors, curators and archaeology: Who owns the past? In M. Pluciennik (Ed.), The responsibilities of archaeologists: Archaeology and ethics (pp. 39–46). Oxford: Tempus Reparatum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallas, C., Chatzidiakou, N., Benardou, A., Bender, M., Berra, A., Clivaz, J., et al. (2017). European survey on scholarly practices and digital needs in the arts and humanities—Highlights report. Paris: DARIAH.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Clercq, W., Bats, M., Bourgeois, J., Crombé, P., De Mulder, G., De Reu, J., et al. (2012). Development-led archaeology in flanders: An overview of practices and results in the period 1990–2010. In Development-Led Archaeology in North-West Europe: Proceedings of a Round Table at the University of Leicester 19th–21st November 2009 (pp. 29–55).

    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 

  • Degraeve, A. (2012). L’accessibilité de nos collections patrimoniales et l’Union européenne. In Documentation du patrimoine, vol. 2 of Thema & Collecta (pp. 36–41). Bruxelles: ICOMOS Wallonie-Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demoule, J.-P. (2007). Scientific quality, control and the general organization of French archaeology. In W. J. H. Willems & M. H. v. d. Dries (Eds.), Quality management in archaeology (pp. 135–147). Oxford: Oxbow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demoule, J.-P. (2012). Rescue archaeology: A European view. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 611–626.

    Article  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 

  • Everill, P. (2012). The invisible diggers: A study of British commercial archaeology (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxbow Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faniel, I., Kansa, E., Whitcher Kansa, S., Barrera-Gomez, J., & Yakel, E. (2013). The challenges of digging data: A study of context in archaeological data reuse. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JCDL’13 (pp. 295–304). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, W., & Doershuk, J. F. (1998). Cultural resource management and American archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research, 6(2), 121–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groarke, L., & Warrick, G. (2006). Stewardship gone astray? Ethics and the SAA. In C. Scarre & G. Scarre (Eds.), The ethics of archaeology (pp. 163–177). Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggrén, G. (2014). Haloo muinaisjäännösrekisteri: kylät mukaan! [Hello sites and monuments record: include village sites!] SKAS, 1, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. (2011). Surface assemblages: Towards an archaeology in and of the present. Archaeological Dialogues, 18(2), 141–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Huvila, I. (2009a). Ecological framework of information interactions and information infrastructures. Journal of Information Science, 35(6), 695–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila, I. (2009b). Steps towards a participatory digital library and data archive for archaeological information. In Proceedings of the 10th Libraries in the Digital Age (LIDA) 2009 Conference. Dubrovnik and Zadar, Croatia (pp. 149–159). Zadar: University of Zadar.

    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. (2012). 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.

  • Huvila, I. (2014). 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. (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.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, T., & Schofield, J. (Eds.). (2016). The ethics of cultural heritage. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, O. W. (Ed.). (2012). Histories of archaeological practices: Reflections on methods, strategies and social organisation in past fieldwork. Stockholm: National Historical Museum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinahan, J. (2013). Heat and dust: Some reflections on contract archaeology in southern Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin, 68(197), 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristiansen, K. (2009). Contract archaeology in Europe: An experiment in diversity. World Archaeology, 41(4), 641–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kritz, A. (2010). Kriterier för bedömning av kvalitet i uppdragsarkeologin (Report). Stockholm: RAÄ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulturminneslagen [Swedish Cultural Heritage Act] 1988:950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, G. (2001). Critical approaches to fieldwork contemporary and historical archaeological practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luoto, K. (2015). Vastine Muinaistutkijan (3/2015) pääkirjoitukseen “Firmat, kilpailu ja arkeologia” [Reply to the Editorial of Muinaistutkija (3/2015) “Firms, competition and archaeology”]. Muinaistutkija, 4, 54–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Museiverket. (2016). Kvalitetsanvisningarna för de arkeologiska fältarbetena i Finland [Quality guidelines for archaeological fieldwork in Finland]. Helsingfors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ndlovu, N. (2014). Contract archaeology in South Africa: Some ethical concerns. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 49(2), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novaković, P., Horňák, M., Guermandi, M. P., Stäuble, H., Depaep, P., & Demoule, J.-P. (Eds.). (2016). Recent Developments in Preventive Archaeology in Europe: Proceedings of the 22nd EAA Meeting in Vilnius, 2016. Ljubljana: Ljubljana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oikarinen, T., & Kortelainen, T. (2013). Challenges of diversity, consistency, and globality in indexing of local archeological artifacts. Knowledge Organization, 40(2), 123–135.

    Article  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 

  • Pearce, S. M. (1995). On collecting: An investigation into collecting in the European tradition. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • RAÄ. (2012). Uppdragsarkeologi (2 kap, 10–13 §§). Rapportering och dokumentationsmaterial (Rapport). Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocabado, P. (2015). Neoliberal multiculturalism and contract archeology in northern Chile. International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 19(4), 775–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salle, M. L., & Hutchings, R. (2016). Commercial archaeology in British Columbia. The Midden, 44(2), 8–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, J., Carman, J., & Belford, P. (2011). Archaeological practice in Great Britain: A heritage handbook. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Seppänen, L. (2014). Is the output worth of input? Estimating the value of past excavations for new information. In Presentation at the CHNT 2014 Conference, Vienna, Nov, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, D. J. (2009). Introduction: International perspectives on the archaeological grey literature. Grey Journal, 5(2), 64–66.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Shepherd, N. (2007). What does it mean ‘to give the past back to the people’? Archaeology and ethics in the postcolony. In Archaeology and capitalism: From ethics to politics (pp. 99–114). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinn, D., & Soares, N. (2014). Historians’ use of digital archival collections: The web, historical scholarship, and archival research. JASIST, 65(9), 1794–1809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyllberg, E. (2013). Uppdragsarkeologins målgrupper – en utvärdering av publik arkeologisk verksamhet och av hur de arkeologiska resultaten tas om hand i samhällsplaneringen och i skolan (Rapport) [Many target groups of development-led archaeology – an evaluation of public archaeology and how archaeological results are used in societal planning and in schools]. Uppsala: Länsstyrelsen i Uppsala län.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stjernberg, F. (2010). Comments on assessing and measuring: On quality in development-led archaeology. Current Swedish Archaeology, 18(1), 47–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Styhre, A. (2018). Intersectionality and professional work in the life sciences: Constructing identities on the basis of affirmation, dis-identification, and professional distancing. Ephemera, 18(1), 51–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. (2006). The great dark book: Archaeology, experience, and interpretation. In J. Bintliff (Ed.), A companion to archaeology (pp. 21–36). Malden and Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, C. (1989). Excavation as theatre. Antiquity, 63(239), 275–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toms, E. G., & O’Brien, H. L. (2008). Understanding the information and communication technology needs of the e-humanist. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 102–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willems, W. J. H. (2005). Contract archaeology and quality management in the Netherlands. In M. van den Dries & W. J. H. Willems (Eds.), Innovatie in de Nederlandse Archeologie (pp. 153–161). Gouda: SIKB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willems, W. J. H., & Dries, M. H. v. d. (2007). Quality management in archaeology. Oxford: Oxbow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witmore, C. L. (2004). On multiple fields. Between the material world and media: Two cases from the Peloponnesus, Greece. Archaeological Dialogues, 11(2), 133–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, L. J., & Branam, K. M. (2014). Collaborating with Stakeholders. In J. Balme & A. Paterson (Eds.), Archaeology in practice: A student guide to archaeological analyses (pp. 1–25). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorzin, N. (2010). The political economy of a commercial archaeology: A Quebec case-study. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton, Southampton. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/344777/.

Suggested Readings

  • 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., Petersson, B., & Huvila, I. (2015). Information policy for (digital) information in archaeology: Current state and suggestions for development. Internet Archaeology, 40. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.40.4.

  • Everill, P. (2012). The invisible diggers: A study of British commercial archaeology (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxbow Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, O. W. (Ed.). (2012). Histories of archaeological practices: Reflections on methods, strategies and social organisation in past fieldwork. Stockholm: National Historical Museum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

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

    Isto Huvila & Lisa Börjesson

Authors
  1. Isto Huvila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lisa Börjesson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isto Huvila .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

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

    Lisa Börjesson

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

    Isto Huvila

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huvila, I., Börjesson, L. (2019). Contract Archaeology. In: Börjesson, L., Huvila, I. (eds) Research Outside The Academy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94177-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94177-6_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94176-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94177-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation