Community Engagement and Cultural Heritage in Southeast Asian Archaeology

Abstract

The diverse archaeology and colonial history of Southeast Asia have influenced ideas of cultural heritage. From policy to general perception to academic discourse, discussions of cultural heritage are as diverse as the population of Southeast Asia. Archaeology, however, is in the best position to contribute to these discussions, as the discipline is primarily concerned with tangible heritage, and archaeologists frequently work with descendant communities. This aspect of archaeology, commonly referred to as public or community archaeology, is a significant shift in the practice of the discipline. With the active involvement of stakeholders in our work, communities are able to relate the long forgotten past to their cultural identities, empower them to own their past, and provide a better appreciation of the work of archaeologists. This chapter calls for an engaged Southeast Asian archaeology to develop a more nuanced discussion on cultural heritage. It focuses on work with the Ifugao (Philippines) as a case study to highlight the importance of community involvement.

Indigenous or Biomedical Ethics, or Both? A Consideration From Health-Related Ethnographic Research Conducted in a Rural Setting

“…Notwithstanding, pragmatism provides space for conducting research in real-life settings in realistic, practical, and acceptable ways to research participants and researchers (Baker & Schaltegger, 2015). This is especially the case for qualitative research such as ethnography, which is fluid and the course of data collection directed by participants (Acabado & Martin, 2015). Unfortunately, most participants in our study were unwilling to thumbprint, as some stated that their verbal consent was enough.…”

“…Besides having to use some of the allotted fieldwork time, the researcher could not remove participants who insisted on verbal consent during the process, as the researcher could not provide plausible explanations acceptable to the participant without losing face and risking the rejection of future researchers in the community. This dilemma is why qualitative researchers recommend flexibility in conducting research in natural settings to promote a power balance between researchers and participants and incorporate participants' ethical conventions in fieldwork (Acabado & Martin, 2015; Mapedzahama & Dune, 2017).…”