High‐resolution airborne Light Detection and Ranging data, ethics and archaeology

Considerations from the northeastern United States

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12430331
AutoresKatharine M Johnson (0000-0001-7530-762X, North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies North Carolina State University Asheville North Carolina USA, autor correspondente), Timothy H Ives (Rhode Island Historical Preservation and Heritage Commission Providence Rhode Island USA), William B Ouimet (0000-0002-1063-2082, Department of Geosciences University of Connecticut Mansfield Connecticut USA), Sarah P Sportman (Office of State Archaeology and Connecticut State Museum of Natural History University of Connecticut Mansfield Connecticut USA)
Ano2021
Volume28
Fascículo3
Páginas293-303
Data de publicação2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoArchaeological Prospection (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1075-2196 • E-ISSN: 1099-0763
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/arp.1836
OpenAlexW3197520377
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas6
Referências citadas34

Publicly available Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) datasets have become widely accessible in the northeastern United States and beyond in the past 10 years. The increase in dataset availability and accessibility coupled with a number of publications detailing the types of cultural features that can be identified has made it necessary to explore and discuss positive impacts and risks to cultural features on this landscape. Access to detailed, documented locations of archaeological resources at state or federal agencies in the United States is typically limited to those with certain credentials, yet many locations of features and sites, both documented and undocumented, are now available to anyone who can access these datasets and effectively interpret them. This presents a challenge for cultural resource management professionals and the field of archaeology; for while LiDAR datasets have had many positive impacts, it is not yet obvious what the unintended impacts of feature exposure might be. Risks to sites are worth considering in the northeastern United States, where (1) region‐wide LiDAR data are publicly available and accessible, (2) many cultural features are widely accessible and not well monitored and (3) case studies have been published that provide guidance on how to identify specific types of cultural landscape features using LiDAR data. We discuss the nuances of those topics here, provide examples of how the datasets have impacted archaeology in the northeastern United States and explore possible mitigation strategies to maintain data accessibility while also protecting important cultural features in this region

Archaeology · Data science · Environmental resource management · Feature (linguistics · Field (mathematics · Geography · Lidar · Remote sensing · Resource (disambiguation · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage · Archaeological Research and Protection · Computer Science · Conservation Techniques and Studies · Environmental Science