The Co-Evolution of Aerial Survey Technology and Epistemic Injustice
From Colonial Instruments to Digital Scanners in Cambodia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22018945 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sayumphu Ros (0009-0008-3422-8659, Institute of Technology of Cambodia, corresponding author), Sayumphu Ros Sayumphu Ros |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 75-85 |
| Publication date | 2025-10-20 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Herança (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2184-3090 • E-ISSN: 2184-3090 |
| Publisher | UK Zhende Publishing Limited Company (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.52152/heranca.v8i3.1197 |
| OpenAlex | W4415723350 |
| Language | EN |
This article investigates the co-evolution of aerial survey technology and epistemic injustice in Cambodian archaeology, tracing developments from French colonial photogrammetry to contemporary LiDAR mapping. Using Science and Technology Studies (STS) approach grounded in Actor–Network Theory (ANT), it examines how human and non-human actors, colonial surveyors, satellites, algorithms, GIS systems, interact to shape heritage narratives and constrain Khmer epistemologies. The analysis is enhanced by four conceptual tools that aim to highlight the differences in meaning across epistemic systems, insider versus outsider interpretations, and its potential impact on the erasure of local knowledge systems. These frameworks reveal how aerial technologies embed asymmetrical power relations, privileging etic, external classifications over emic, local understandings, and reclassifying spiritual and living heritage as static data points. The article contributes to the ongoing decolonization of digital archaeology, particularly the shift from participation alone to network reconfiguration, and to propose an enforceable ethics architecture, instead of siloed efforts such as research permits, MoUs, data-deposit rules, and co-interpretation protocols, to secure data sovereignty, shared authorship, and community benefit. While LiDAR offers unprecedented mapping capabilities, its deployment without equitable access, co-interpretation, and community benefit risks reproducing colonial legacies. The article concludes with structural reform proposals such as data sovereignty clauses, dual interpretive layers, and capacity-building measures to reconfigure archaeological networks toward epistemic justice and ethical technological integration, ensuring Khmer heritage is understood and represented on its own terms
Actor–network theory · Colonialism · Decolonization · Economic Justice · Epistemic community · Interrogation · Photogrammetry · Sovereignty · Traditional knowledge · Archaeological Research and Protection · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Cambodian History and Society
| Highly cited | No |
|---|