Climate change has drastic effects around the globe, the risk of sea levels rising from the melting ice caps present a danger for archaeologists as coastal archaeological sites are put at a high risk of erosion. However, GIS technology has given archaeologists an opportunity to better visualize the rates of coastal erosion and at-risk archeological sites. A current example of this would be at the coastal town of Tuktoyaktuk in the Northwest Territories, Canada. This image, taken from Mike O’Rourke’s Ph.D. thesis (2018), shows the erosion rate of the coastline at Toker Point, near Tuktoyaktuk. O’Rourke uses GIS technology to map the rate of coastal erosion in this area. The red line displays the coastline from the 1950s and the green line shows the coastline in 2004. This research displays that there has been a significant loss of land around Tuktoyaktuk from both rising sea levels and coastal erosion. O’Rourke’s research also assists with predicting which archaeological sites on the coast are at risk from this rapid erosion. The rate of coastal erosion was found to pose a severe risk to the current-day occupants of the town of Tuktoyaktuk as well.
Another example of this from Reeder, et al., (2012) which looks at the use of GIS in California’s Santa Barbara Channel region. Reeder et al., (2012) focuses on coastal erosion from climate change as well as the potential for urban development in the area. This image displays archaeological sites which were coded according to a cultural resource vulnerability index. Red indicates a site at high-risk, and blue indicates a low-risk site. The aim of this research was to quantify the most vulnerable archaeological sites in the Santa Barbara Channel and it was found that 57 sites were classified as very high-risk and 270 sites were at high-risk.
Both examples utilize GIS to identify high-risk archaeological sites, and this research could assist with the mitigation of these sites. Although it would be impossible to excavate all at-risk sites, it certainly helps archaeologists to determine where archaeological work should be performed. Can this work also be used to increase collaboration with descendent communities? Could descendent communities gain more agency in archaeological work by informing archaeologists which of the at-risk sites should be prioritized? If archaeologists were to disseminate this information, in the form of the maps seen above, assist with public engagement in archaeology? At the very least, these maps can clearly illustrate the impact of climate change and coastal erosion on coastal communities. Please leave any thoughts you have in the comments below!
-Kaylee
2 comments:
Hi Kaylee, thank you for your informative post on GIS and how it is used to assist the archeological site work. I always appreciate the sort of technology that aids our visual comprehension of things. I think it is a great point that you raise whether this sort of GIS information could facilitate public engagement in archaeology, and my thought on this question is affirmative. At least from the two images you presented, they deliver effective messages (no complex terminology as well as using colors to indicate key points). Even though I have no knowledge of GIS, I could immediately get what the GIS information is about. I would also say the diachronic demonstration (comparing the site in two periods) is helpful to let the public understand the continual impact that the site has been enduring. I feel this is especially important because the general public, especially in wealthy countries, tends to have a very vague idea about climate change and its impact on the cultural, social, and economic aspects of humanity, due to the fact that they are significantly less vulnerable than those in low-income/developing countries. GIS could be used to substantialize these climate change impacts and could be an effective tool to educate the public. I just wonder in what ways this sort of information would be disseminated to the public. I think skills and resources are critical in this respect. Whether there are supportive institutions, whether there is funding to do this, or whether people with GIS research and production skills would be hired for the initiative, are critical to the realization of the educational value of the GIS technology.
Kaylee,
Super interesting and important post. I have seen the rate the Beaufort sea coastline is eroding at and how it is visibly changing each year. Mike's work is special because he is using GIS to not only map the coastal erosion rates and impacts on the sites, but is incorporating traditionL and local knowledge into his mapping to determine site significance and site vulnerability. Therefore, he is not only relying on archaeological understandings of what makes a site significant. He is engaging the public in Tuk through community workshops and interviews. As a Parks Canada employee working along the Beaufort Sea coast, I have had to learn about the erosion rates and worked with erosion scientists to map and predict the erosion in our parks. The entire western coastline to Nunavut is at risk, but the erosion in Tuk is affecting houses and other structures in the Hamlet in addition to significant cultural and archaeological sites. Tuk is an interesting case to look at because local and traditional perspectives are being collected and the community is active in the decision making about how to respond to the erosion for both the community and the archaeological sites surrounding it. I am very interested in this (as you can tell from this long comment) and there is so much more to learn about erosion in this area. If you are interested in learning more, I recommend you explore these links:
https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/47923/1/AMIrrgang_Poster_ArcticChange_2017_V2.pdf
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/as-2017-0041
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/simply-science/20661
-Ash
Post a Comment