Ethically Digital: Contested Cultural Heritage in Digital Context
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Over the past century, our understanding of cultural heritage has evolved, and now, heritage is seen more as a process than a product. Although the advancement of digital technologies has significantly aided in the research, protection, management, interpretation, and education of cultural heritage, it also raises the question of how far this technology works in accordance with our current understanding of heritage as a process and is not taking a reductionist approach, in which heritage is cut off from its community and context. Ethical risks are higher for contested heritage, when meaning and values are questioned, or when people's ability to access and enjoy heritage is threatened. This paper discusses potential ethical risks regarding access, control, dissemination, and the digital economy by looking at existing approaches, guidelines, and principles in this field and a few digital heritage projects about contested heritage, and it questions whether the lack of an inclusive ethical framework could lead to a new kind of digital colonisation.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
From 18 May 2018, the contents of Studies in Digital Heritage are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Our submitting authors pay no fee and retain the copyright to their own work.
How this works: to submit their work to the journal, authors grant Studies in Digital Heritage a nonexclusive license to distribute the work according to a CC BY-NC 4.0 license. Once an article is published, anyone is free to share and adapt its contents—provided only that they do so for noncommercial purposes and properly attribute the shared or adapted information. Details of these terms can be found on the Creative Commons website.
Download SDH’s full author agreement here
Studies in Digital Heritage will insert the following note at the end of any work published in the journal:
© [Year] by the authors. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY-NC 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
References
Amr AL-Azm and Katie A. Paul. 2019. Facebook’s Black Market In Antiquities Trafficking, Terrorism, And War Crimes. (2019). Retrieved Nov 10, 2022 from http://atharproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ATHAR-FB-Report-June-2019-final.pdf
Van Ameneyro. 2022. Nfts As Cultural Heritage. (2022). Retrieved Dec 22, 2022 from https://undrgrnd.io/undrgrnd/nfts-as-cultural-heritage
Dorian Batycka. 2022. Italy Instructs Museums to Halt Contracts With NFT Companies, Citing ‘Unregulated’ Terms That Could Affect the Country’s Cultural Heritage. (2022). Retrieved Nov 15, 2022 from https://news.artnet.com/market/cinello-nft-michaelangelo-2145003
Frédéric Bobin. 2015. Disputes damage hopes of rebuilding Afghanistan’s Bamiyan Buddhas. (2015). Retrieved Nov 14, 2022 from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/rebuild-bamiyan-buddhas-taliban-afghanistan
Sarah Bond. 2016. The ethics of 3D-printing Syria’s cultural heritage. Forbes (September 22, 2016). Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/drsarahbond/2016/09/22/does-nycs-new-3d-printed-palmyra-arch-celebrate-syria-or-just-engage-in-digital-colonialism/?sh=65650fd177db
Carroll, S. R., Edit Herczog, Maui Hudson, Keith Russell, & Shelley Stall. (2021). Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR Principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data, 8(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00892-0
Council of Europe. 2005. Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://rm.coe.int/1680083746.
Edward Delman. 2015. Afghanistan's Buddhas Rise Again. (2015). Retrieved Nov 14, 2022 from https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/06/3d-buddhas-afghanistan/395576/.
Michael Fisher, Michael Fradley, Pascal Flohr, Bijan Rouhani and Francesca Simi. 2021. Ethical considerations for remote sensing and open data in relation to the endangered archaeology in the Middle East and North Africa project. Archaeological Prospection 28, 3 (2021), 279-292. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/arp.1816.
Giuliano Foschini. 2022. “Tesori svenduti”, il Mibac frena sugli Nft dell’arte. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2022/05/25/news/tesori_in_pericolo_il_mibac_frena_sugli_nft_dellarte-351085818/.
Fabrizio Galeazzi. 2018. 3-D Virtual Replicas and Simulations of the Past “Real” or “Fake” Representations? Current Anthropology, 59, 3 (2018), 268-286. https://doi.org/10.1086/697489.
Global Heritage Fund. 2022. Pysanka NFTs for Ukraine. GHF/Celemta. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://art.globalheritage.io/.
Glitch Studios. 2022. How cultural heritage is leveraging blockchain and NFTs to reconnect to their audience. (2022) Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.glitchstudios.co/stories-archive/how-cultural-heritage-is-leveraging-blockchain-and-nfts-to-reconnect-to-their-audience/
Junhi Han, Mohammad Rasoul Bawary, Andrea Bruno. 2018. The Bamiyan Buddhas: Issues of reconstruction. World Heritage 86, (2018), 40-45.
Gareth Harris. 2022a. Copies of the Parthenon Marbles—carved by a robot—to go on show in London. Retrieved 20 August 2022 from https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/07/13/copies-of-the-parthenon-marblescarved-by-a-robotto-go-on-show-in-london
Gareth Harris. 2022b. Uffizi gallery makes only €70,000 from Michelangelo NFT that sold for €240,000. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/06/13/uffizi-gallery-makes-only-euro70000-from-michelangelo-nft-that-sold-for-euro240000.
ICOMOS. 2008a. The ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites. ICOMOS. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/interpretation_e.pdf.
ICOMOS. 2008b. Québec Declaration on the Preservation of the Spirit of Place. ICOMOS, Adopted at Québec, Canada, October 4th 2008. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-646-2.pdf.
ICOMOS. 2017. THE SEVILLE PRINCIPLES: INTERNATIONAL PRINCIPLES OF VIRTUAL ARCHAEOLOGY. ICOMOS. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from http://sevilleprinciples.com/.
ICORP and ICCROM. 2015. Overview Report of the Nepal Cultural Emergency Crowdmap Initiative. Retrieved June 10, 2022 from https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/nepal-cultural-emergency-crowdmap-initiative-overview-report.pdf
Benjamin Isakhan and Lynn Meskell. 2019. UNESCO’s project to ‘Revive the Spirit of Mosul’: Iraqi and Syrian opinion on heritage reconstruction after the Islamic State. International Journal of Heritage Studies 25, 11 (2019), 1189-1204. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2019.1578988.
Jukka Jokilehto, Christina Cameron, Michel Parent, and Michael Petzet. International Council on Monuments and Sites. 2008. The World Heritage List: What Is OUV? Defining the Outstanding Universal Value of Cultural World Heritage Properties: An Icomos Study. Berlin Paris: Hendrik Bässler Verlag ; ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites.
Eric C Kansa. 2022. The Great Digital Lost and Found: Challenges and Possibilities in Managing Cultural Heritage Data. Conservation Perspectives, 37, 2 (2022), 4-9. https://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/newsletters/pdf/v37n2.pdf
Roshni Khunti. 2018. The Problem with Printing Palmyra: Exploring the Ethics of Using 3D Printing Technology to Reconstruct Heritage. Studies in Digital Heritage 2, 1 (2018), 1-12. https://dx.doi.org/10.14434/sdh.v2i1.24590.
Alexandra Kolesnik and Aleksandr Rusanov. 2020. Heritage-As-Process and its Agency: Perspectives of (Critical) Heritage Studies. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3746304.
Robin Letellier, Werner Schmid, and François LeBlanc. 2007. Recording, documentation, and information management for the conservation of heritage places: Guiding Principles. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles. http://hdl.handle.net/10020/gci_pubs/recordim.
Franz Lidz. 2022. The robot guerrilla campaign to re-create the Parthenon Marbles. Retrieved September 18, 2022 from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/science/elgin-marbles-3d-print.html.
Aleksandrina V. Mavrodieva and Rajib Shaw. 2021. Social Media in Disaster Management. In: Shaw, R., Kakuchi, S., Yamaji, M. (eds) Media and Disaster Risk Reduction. Disaster Risk Reduction. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0285-6_4
Lynn Meskell. 2018. A Future in Ruins. UNESCO, World Heritage, and the Dream of Peace. New York NY: Oxford University Press.
Pinar Oruç. (2022). Rethinking Who ‘Keeps’ Heritage: 3D Technology, Repatriation and Copyright. GRUR International, 71(12), 1138–1146. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikac096
Santana Quintero, M., Fai, S., Smith, L., Duer, A., & Barazzetti, L. (2019). ETHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR HERITAGE RECORDING SPECIALISTS APPLYING DIGITAL WORKFLOWS FOR CONSERVATION. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-2/W15, 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W15-1063-2019
Annie Singla and Rajat Agrawal. 2022. Social media and disaster management: investigating challenges and enablers. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication (2022) https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-12-2021-0206.
Laurajane Smith. 2006. Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Erin L. Thompson. 2017. Legal and Ethical Considerations for Digital Recreations of Cultural Heritage. Chapman Law Review 20, 1 (2017), 153-176. https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/chapman-law-review/vol20/iss1/6/?utm_source=digitalcommons.chapman.edu%2Fchapman-law-review%2Fvol20%2Fiss1%2F6&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
UNESCO. 2010. Basic Texts of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. 2010th ed. Paris France: Intangible Cultural Heritage Section Sector for Culture UNESCO.
UNESCO. 2022. Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/in/documentViewer.xhtml?v=2.1.196&id=p::usmarcdef_0000381137&file=/in/rest/annotationSVC/DownloadWatermarkedAttachment/attach_import_e86c4b5d-5af9-4e15-be60-82f1a09956fd%3F_%3D381137eng.pdf&updateUrl=updateUrl6756&ark=/ark:/48223/pf0000381137/PDF/381137eng.pdf.multi&fullScreen=true&locale=en#1517_21_EN_SHS_int.indd%3A.8918%3A4.
James Vincent. 2023. Getty Images is suing the creators of AI art tool Stable Diffusion for scraping its content. Retrieved Feb 24, 2023 from https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23558516/ai-art-copyright-stable-diffusion-getty-images-lawsuit
Charly Wilder. 2016. Swiping a Priceless Antiquity ... With a Scanner and a 3-D Printer. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/arts/design/other-nefertiti-3d-printer.html#:~:text=An%20article%20on%20Wednesday%20about,who%20commented%20on%20the%20project
Mark D. Wilkinson, Michel Dumontier, I Jsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, Myles Axton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg, Jan-Willem Boiten, Luiz Bonino da Silva Santos, Philip E Bourne et al. 2016. The Fair Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship. Scientific Data 3 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18.
Xiaoxu Liang, Yanjun Lu and John Martin. 2021. A Review of the Role of Social Media for the Cultural Heritage Sustainability. Sustainability 13, 3 (2021), 1055. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13031055.
Shoshana Zuboff. 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. First ed. New York: PublicAffairs.