Technical Brief 23Archeology and Civic Engagement Published by the DOI Departmental Consulting Archeologist/NPS Archeology 
Program, National Park Service, Washington, DC, November 2008. In the United States and elsewhere, efforts to strengthen communities and 
democratic processes, as well as promote public dialogue, rely upon active 
citizen engagement in community and civic life through the creation of social 
capital. Archeology can play a role in these efforts, particularly as 
archeological projects increasingly involve the communities in which they occur 
and as archeologists recognize their ethical responsibilities to involve 
multiple stakeholders. This technical brief provides explanations of civic 
engagement and social capital as well as case studies and suggestions for ways 
that archeologists can participate and contribute to the creation of social 
capital.
  What is Civic Engagement? Definitions of civic engagement vary somewhat, but they have in common the 
elements of involvement and participation in public life. According to Thomas 
Ehrlich in *Civic Responsibility and Higher Education* (2000:vi), �Civic 
engagement means working to make a difference in the civic life of our 
communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and 
motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a 
community, through both political and non-political processes.� Civic engagement 
means building communities by creating or reinforcing relationships between 
people and promoting a healthy dialogue about, and active participation in, 
civic life. Many kinds of institutions have become involved in civic engagement. 
Institutions of higher education often use service learning initiatives in order 
to satisfy civic engagement responsibilities. In land managing agencies such as 
the National Park Service (NPS), civic engagement refers to a long-term effort 
to build and sustain meaningful communication and partnerships with local 
communities, park visitors, and a diverse array of stakeholders. These community 
groups and individuals may play meaningful roles in guiding interpretive and 
educational programming as well as the planning process. Civic engagement differs from public involvement in both concept and 
implementation. Public involvement, sometimes referred to as �consultation,� is 
a legal requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the 
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) planning processes and typically ends 
when the planning process is complete. Civic engagement, on the other hand, is a 
sustained effort and activity. It moves beyond the short-term legal requirements 
of public planning to build and strengthen relationships between people in their 
communities over an extended time period. An example of public involvement is a 
community meeting to get input before starting a project. Civic engagement, on 
the other hand, might incorporate the public meeting, but also include community 
members before, during and after the project, such as on the planning committee 
and in partnerships with local organizations to leverage funds, to determine the 
scope of a project, find volunteers, gather and disseminate information, and 
build interest in heritage or history opportunities beyond the �usual suspects.� 
Civic engagement can thus strengthen public understanding of the full meaning 
and contemporary relevance of both cultural and natural resources. One widely read study of the trends in civic society is Robert Putnam's 
(2000) *Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.* 
The specific assertions of that study, namely that the United States has 
suffered a dramatic fall in civic engagement since the 1940s and 1950s, have 
been contested (see Skocpol 1996 and Boggs 2001 for examples). The debate around 
*Bowling Alone,* however, has served to reinforce the consensus that 
civic engagement, in a variety of forms, is critical to the success of the 
nation. In 1996, Putnam, at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard 
University, started the Saguaro Seminar on Civic Engagement in America. This 
project works to expand knowledge about trust and community engagement and to 
develop strategies to increase engagement. The Saguaro Seminar's (2000) 
multi-year dialogue on building bonds of civic trust is summarized in the 
report, �BetterTogether,� 
available online. In that report, the Seminar participants consider five areas 
of life and identify efforts and the potential for rebuilding civic bonds and 
connections. The areas they consider are the Workplace; the Arts; Politics and 
Government; Religion; and Schools, Youth Organizations and Families. History and 
historic preservation appear briefly under �the Arts,� but as demonstrated by 
the authors in such books as *Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement* 
(Little and Shackel 2008) and *Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: 
Engaging Descendant Communities* (Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2008), 
civic engagement has a distinct role in the work of archeologists when they 
initiate or join community projects which use archeology to examine social 
issues or build trust among participants. The Saguaro Seminar did not adequately consider the role of archeology or 
history or how the past might be used in civic engagement. Other organizations 
such as the American Association of Museums, NPS, and the International 
Coalition of Sites of Conscience actively use the past as a tool of civic 
engagement. As historian John Hope Franklin (2000), in his role as chair of the 
National Park System Advisory Board, succinctly states, inclusive history is 
relevant to citizenship: The places that commemorate sad history are not places in which we 
  wallow, or wallow in remorse, but instead places in which we may be moved to a 
  new resolve, to be better citizens....Explaining history from a variety of 
  angles makes it not only more interesting, but also more true. When it is more 
  true, more people come to feel that they have a part in it. That is where 
  patriotism and loyalty intersect with truth.  What is Social Capital? Social capital is a concept introduced in the early 1900s to describe good 
will, fellowship, sympathy and social interaction in the daily lives of people 
who make up a social unit. Social capital can be thought of as connections of 
trust, reciprocity, shared values, and networks among individuals. The concept 
has been picked up by the World Bank and other international organizations 
because it is clear that social capital for people of all ages and walks of life 
is essential for the efficient functioning of both modern economies and stable 
democracies. In *BetterTogether,* the Saguaro Seminar (2000:8-9) lists principles 
for building social capital that highlight some of its important 
characteristics. The Social Capital Impact Principle. As a lens for evaluating 
  institutions, programs, and individual behavior, social capital can gain 
  impact to become a standard part of institutional and individual decision 
  making.The recycling principle. Drawing upon social capital generates more social 
  capital.The bridging principle. Alliances between people who are more alike than 
  different create bonding social capital. Connections among differences form 
  bridging social capital. Although both forms of social capital are valuable, 
  bridging is more critical for civic renewal.The C2C principle. C2C refers to communication from Citizen to Citizen and 
  community to community. Such communication strengthens horizontal cooperation 
  and reciprocity.  Why Get Involved in Civic Engagement? According to the analysis of Saguaro Seminar of Civic Engagement in America, 
America is facing a civic crisis. The seminar members (2000:3) are emphatic: Most Americans see no obvious connection between dinner parties 
  and the health of American society and democracy. More worrisome is the fact 
  that many Americans fail to see the connection between political participation 
  and the nation's well being. However, without strong habits of social and 
  political participation, the world's longest and most successful experiment in 
  democracy is at risk of losing the very norms, networks, and institutions of 
  civic life that have made us the most emulated and respected nation in 
  history. The reversal of this downward spiral is critical to the civic and 
  social health of our nation. Civic culture will not automatically restore itself. Instead, it requires 
deliberate intentional effort. Active participation in the study, preservation, 
and presentation of heritage by archeologists can play a vital role in that 
process. Within NPS, for example, the Civic Engagement initiative is embraced as 
a challenge to find new ways to revitalize its mission of preserving and 
interpreting our nation's natural and cultural heritage and ensuring the 
long-term relevance of resources and programs. The challenge includes finding 
ways in which people can personally relate as individuals or as a group to the 
nation's heritage and communicate in ways that they prefer. A heritage or 
cultural relationship relationship from the past that is overlooked is one that 
becomes invisible to present and future generations. In the report 
*Rethinking the National Parks for the 21st Century,* the National Park 
System Advisory Board (2001:14) further explains the importance of linking past 
with present: The study of our nation's history, formal and informal, is an 
  essential part of our civic education. In a democratic society such as ours, 
  it is important to understand the journey of liberty and justice, together 
  with the economic, social, religious, and other forces that barred or opened 
  the ways for our ancestors, and the distances yet to be covered.  How Can Archeology Contribute to Civic Engagement? Archeology has a unique role to play in Civic Engagement because 
fundamentally it is in the business of creating knowledge from a resource often 
held in the public trust: the archeological record. Furthermore, many 
archeologists adhere to ethical responsibilities, not only to make that 
knowledge available to both the public and other professionals, but also to 
involve multiple stakeholders in the process of creating such knowledge. The 
principle of accountability in the Society for American Archaeology's 1996 
principles of archaeological ethics reads: �Responsible archaeological research, 
including all levels of professional activity, requires an acknowledgment of 
public accountability and a commitment to make every reasonable effort, in good 
faith, to consult actively with affected group(s), with the goal of establishing 
a working relationship that can be beneficial to all parties involved.� Members 
of the World Archaeological Congress' (WAC 1990) agree to abide by the ethical 
principle that reads: �To establish equitable partnerships and relationships 
between Members and indigenous peoples whose cultural heritage is being 
investigated.� The International Coalition of Sites of Conscience was founded in 1999 by 
leaders of nine sites with the following declaration: it is the obligation of historic sites to assist the public in 
  drawing connections between the history of our sites and their contemporary 
  implications. We view stimulating dialogue on pressing social issues and 
  promoting humanitarian and democratic values as a primary function. Such locations seek to provide an environment wherein visitors can have a 
civic engagement experience that provides access to a more complete 
understanding about the past and allows them to make linkages between that past 
and contemporary America. Historic site museums are not the only such places; at 
many archeological sites, public interpretation can contribute to these 
opportunities through the unique and long-term perspective that archeology 
brings to understandings of the past. Furthermore, the process of archeology can create social capital through 
increasing communication and positive relationships between civic groups, 
particularly those that may be in conflict or do not have many connections or 
common interests. Archeology is influenced by the overlapping, and often 
conflicting interests of various groups comprising both local and descendent 
communities. Dealing with many interested parties can be seen as a hindrance, 
but is more productively viewed as an opportunity for archeology to help create 
multiple bridges between individuals and community groups. Positive 
relationships are fostered as differences are re-examined, worked through, and 
new information is learned over the course of the project. In some cases, existing social capital based on a shared archeological 
interest may provide a starting point for creating relationships with and within 
communities. For example, most states and many municipalities have organizations 
established and run by amateur archeologists, some connected formally and some 
independent. Many professional archeologists also participate in these networks 
as well as in their smaller state or regional professional networks. In all of 
these organizations, the shared passion for archeology among all participants 
forms the bridges and bonds that lead to social capital. Other groups can be brought together to create relationships that bridge 
archeological and community interests. Archeological and historical societies as 
well as tribal groups, neighborhood councils, school boards, city planners and a 
host of other civic groups can be positively affected by engaging with and being 
involved in archeology. Furthermore, archeology benefits from the many voices, 
points of view and skills that can be called upon by engaging the researchers as 
well as local and descendent communities with vested interests in the past. Increasing numbers of archeologists are working with communities in varied 
contexts and the number of collaborative, civically engaged projects continues 
to grow. For example, Derry and Malloy (2003) and Marshall (2002) explore 
connections between archeology and local communities; Dongoske et al. (2000) and 
Swidler et al. (1997) provide important examples of archeologists and Native 
Americans working together. Shackel and Chambers (2004) connect public 
archeology and applied anthropology. Contributors to both Colwell-Chanthaphonh 
and Ferguson (2008)and Little and Shackel (2007) discuss issues of archeology 
and civic engagement in a variety of situations. Some ways in which archeologists work with communities is through schools, 
municipal governments and tribal liaisons. One example of a collaboration 
between the federal government and a tribe is the project at On Your Knees Cave 
in Southeast Alaska. Starting with the discovery of ancient human remains in the 
cave in 1993, the USDA Forest Service partnered with academic archeologists and 
paleontologists as well as local Alaska Native communities to excavate and study 
the remains without compromising scientific rigor or religious and spiritual 
principles. Visit the Partnership 
Resource Center for more information on collaboration at On Your Knees 
Cave. Archeologists must work with municipalities for regulatory and other 
law-mandated reasons, but going beyond the requirements to make archeological 
sites part of local pride can be a great way to get people excited about 
archeology as well as bring them together around the history of their community. 
For example, being an active participant in events for local history months or 
weeks, or attending planning sessions to create understanding of the need for 
long-term preservation of archeological resources have positive consequences for 
communities and archeology. Alexandria, 
Virginia provides one example of a community-wide effort to study and 
preserve archeological resources. Social studies, history, and science are part of K-12 curricula around the 
country and archeology is a great way to combine these subjects. For example, 
George Brauer and Patrice Jeppson's work with and within the Baltimore County 
School system (Jeppson and Brauer 2003) is a large scale collaboration. Even if 
active participation by students in data recovery and processing is not an 
option, there are many ways to include schools in community outreach and 
education to distribute the knowledge that archeology creates. The SAA's 
public education website is a source of useful information for archeologists 
and educators about teaching with archeology. Also see Teaching with Historic 
Places lesson plans 
with archeological themes. For example, New 
Philadelphia: A Multiracial Town on the Illinois Frontier explicitly uses 
archaeology to engage students in discussing issues of race and racism.  Examples: Case Studies of Archeology as Civic Engagement *Campus Archeology as Civic Engagement: Indiana University-Purdue 
University and Harvard University* Many colleges and universities have embraced the concepts and tools of civic 
engagement, sometimes integrating them with student service learning 
requirements and sometimes using them to forge better relationships with their 
surrounding communities. IUPUI and Ransom Place Archeology The campus of Indiana University-Purdue University in Indianapolis, Indiana 
(IUPUI) owes much of its current boundary to a massive displacement of urban 
residents from Ransom Place in the 1960s. Paul Mullins was able to tap into the 
stewardship felt both on and off campus for the complex history of the area. 
Through IUPUI field schools and archeological surveys as well as active 
participation of current and past Ransom Place residents, archeology has brought 
the community together to understand the complexities of the neighborhood's 
past. Rather than serving a single demographic for all of its existence, Ransom 
Place had been, at varying times, home to many immigrant and minority 
communities before being demolished to make way for IUPUI buildings and parking 
lots. The neighborhood is remembered mostly for its African American community, 
which had been around since the 1840s, but also was home to Irish, German, 
Russian, Hungarian, and Italian immigrants. By the early twentieth century, 
Ransom Place was predominantly African American and remained as such until it 
was subsumed by IUPUI campus expansion in the 1950s and beyond. With such a diverse set of descendent communities, Ransom Place archeology 
provided an opportunity to bring together various groups as well as forge links 
between the community and the university. As Mullins (2004:25) expresses it, 
�Archaeology has been one surprisingly powerful mechanism to tell this story and 
build relationships that can link descendants, former residents, University 
students and staff, and the many people who feel some claim to these 
neighborhoods.� The archeology project connects the former and current 
landscapes with the social processes that created them. The researchers find 
that archeological tours and other public interpretations are most powerful when 
they connect commonplace objects, such as straight pins and buttons, with broad 
issues like racism and the relegation of African American women to roles as 
laundresses and seamstresses. The archeological project has encouraged a new 
level of historical consciousness and public dialogue. The Harvard Yard Archeology Project The heart of Harvard University's campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts may be 
over 370 years old, but it has undergone massive changes in appearance, 
infrastructure and purpose during its long history. The Harvard Yard 
Archeological Project (HYAP) has, over the last few years, labored to connect 
Harvard students of today with the material evidence of their predecessors. 
Furthermore, HYAP consciously seeks to engage multiple community groups with 
interests in Harvard's past including various academic departments, university 
administration and archives, local and state historical societies, and local 
Native American Tribes. Systematic archeological explorations of Harvard Yard 
have been undertaken periodically since 1979, but HYAP, starting in 2005, was 
the first to use active collaboration at all levels of the process including 
choosing the Harvard Indian College as a focus for research. Throughout most of Harvard's history, the campus has been devoid of Native 
American presence. However, its charter defines it as a place for �the Education 
of the English and Indian Youth of the Country.� Almost two decades after its 
founding in 1636, Harvard experienced severe financial difficulties and launched 
a capital campaign for the education of American Indians. Consequently, the 
*Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Among the Indians,* an 
organization for evangelists, established the New England Company as a proxy for 
donors. Harvard secured funds from *Society for the Propagation of the 
Gospel* with a promise of free tuition and housing for Native students, thus 
the Harvard Indian College joined a wider web of institutions that included 
missions and praying towns as places for transfer of English education and 
life-ways to Native Americans. Few Native students attended the Indian College, however, and it became an 
ever lower priority for the university. English students were housed in the 
building until 1693 when the Harvard Corporation asked for permission from the 
*Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Among the Indians* to tear 
down the hall and reuse the bricks in the construction of Stoughton Hall. Excavations and analysis addressed questions about daily life in the early 
days of Harvard and information about the location and material evidence of the 
Indian College through a class offered as a partnership between the Department 
of Anthropology, the Harvard University Native American Program and the Peabody 
Museum of Archeology and Ethnography. Engagement with local and tribal 
communities was important at every step. For example, planning meetings included 
community consultation and the ceremonial groundbreaking had institutional 
speakers and Native American Blessing. The brainstorming sessions for direction 
on an upcoming HYAP exhibit at the Peabody Museum had representatives from over 
20 community groups who will play important roles in the long-term success of 
the project. In the words of the program's instructors, HYAP is a �way to 
educate the public (Harvard and beyond) on the importance Harvard's unique 
multicultural past and preservation of this past for a variety of stakeholders� 
(Stubbs et al. in press). Independence National Historical Park and the National Constitution Center: 
The Decision to Excavate the James Dexter Site Consultation between Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia 
and two historic independent black churches (Mother Bethel A.M.E. and St. Thomas 
African Episcopal) resulted in an important archeological project. The 
excavation of the James Dexter site is an example of how civic engagement 
reconnected a prominent black church with its historic roots and strengthened 
links to the city's African American community which had traditionally felt that 
its views and interests had been neglected by the park. James Dexter lived on what is now Block 3 of Independence Mall in 
Philadelphia from 1792 to 1798. A free black, he was a founding member of the 
African Episcopal Church of St. Thomas, one of the first two independent black 
churches in America. Early planning meetings for the church were held in his 
house. However, NPS transportation plans, as part of a redesign of the Mall, 
called for a bus dropoff on top of the house site, which would preserve the 
archeological resources undisturbed by surface construction. By listening and responding to the community's legitimate interpretation of 
NPS policy, the park began a consultative process that became a true 
collaboration. Participants in the dialogue about excavations in the block where 
the National Constitution Center (NCC) was built, including the park, the 
churches, the NCC, the Multicultural Affairs Congress of the Philadelphia 
Convention and Visitors Bureau, and the office of Philadelphia City Councilwoman 
Blondell Reynolds Brown. The group agreed that the NCC should include an 
interpretive display of the history uncovered by the research and the 
excavations conducted elsewhere on the block. However, the community 
representatives strongly disagreed with the decision of the NPS to preserve the 
James Dexter site without conducting an archeological excavation. The community challenged the NPS on its position on in-place preservation. 
While the NPS considers such preservation usually to be the most appropriate 
option and first choice, NPS policy allows excavation if there are compelling 
reasons. The church argued that in this case the intense public interest and the 
inherent value in bringing a long hidden piece of our nation's history to the 
fore necessitated the site's excavation. The force and legitimacy of the group's 
argument led the NPS to view the issue in a fresh light and ultimately to 
reverse its decision. The Dexter site case study does not suggest that NPS policy can be superseded 
or overturned because interested parties demand it; instead it reveals at least 
one way that the NPS mission was fulfilled by the goal of the park to tell a 
more complete and inclusive story of the past by investigating the resources 
that were available to tell that history. The results were a shared decision 
that both supported NPS mission and policy and led to a deeper understanding of 
our nation's history. General Services Administration: African Burial Ground, New York City The African Burial Ground project in New York City provides a dramatic case 
study for civic engagement. Agencies can learn a great deal about effective 
engagement by studying both the mistakes and successes of this well-known 
project. In the early 1990s, the General Services Administration (GSA) 
contracted for routine investigations to comply with the National Historic 
Preservation Act in advance of a new federal building at Foley Square in lower 
Manhattan. Historical maps indicated the location of an 18th-century �Negroes Burying 
Ground� but consultants working in advance of the construction assumed that any 
cemetery would have been long since destroyed by subsequent construction. 
Excavations, beginning in the summer of 1991 and continuing through July 1992, 
eventually disinterred more than 400 burials under fill ranging from 13-28 feet 
thick. GSA did not anticipate the storm of public controversy that would be 
unleashed and continue for over a decade. As Cheryl LaRoche and Michael Blakey 
(1997:84) describe, �The dynamics of the relationship and the shape of the 
project have been determined to a large extent by the relentless determination 
of the African American descendent community to exercise control over the 
handling and disposition of the physical remains and artifacts of their 
ancestors.� Concerned citizens, including journalists, religious leaders, 
artists, architects, lawyers and many others came together. The �constant 
barrage of petitions, angry rhetoric and community dissension, congressional 
hearings, professional meetings, lobbying, and political action� (LaRoche and 
Blakey 1997:86) changed the project completely, and forced the continuing public 
engagement aspects of the project, from research design through re-interment 
through memorialization and ongoing public outreach. A statement by former Mayor David Dinkins (1994) makes the cultural 
importance of the African Burial Ground clear: Millions of Americans celebrate Ellis Island as the symbol of 
  their communal identity in this land. Others celebrate Plymouth Rock. Until a 
  few years ago, African-American New Yorkers had no site to call our own. There 
  was no place which said, we were here, we contributed, we played a significant 
  role in New York's history right from the beginning. . . Now we�their 
  descendants�have the symbol of our heritage embodied in the lower Manhattan's 
  African Burial Ground. The African Burial Ground is the irrefutable testimony 
  to the contributions and suffering of our ancestors. Environmental Justice and the NEPA process: The Cypress Freeway Replacement 
Project In 1989 the Loma Prieta earthquake struck the San Francisco Bay area, killing 
42 people and collapsing the Cypress Freeway. Following the earthquake, the 
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) worked to prepare a Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate alternatives for responding to 
the collapse of the freeway. The historical archeology project forged important 
links between the researchers and the local present day community, links that 
inspired the Federal Highway Administration to include the project as an 
important part of its environmental justice efforts in compliance with NEPA. Caltrans worked with a wide range of stakeholders to select a new alignment 
for the freeway that met the needs of both freeway drivers and the community of 
West Oakland. When the Cypress Freeway was built in the 1950s its path split the 
predominantly African American community of West Oakland and uprooted 600 
families and dozens of businesses. The tragedy of the collapse of the Cypress 
Freeway actually created the potential for healing some of the earlier damage to 
the community. West Oaklanders had no outlet to voice their concerns when the 
structure originally was built. Contemporary residents, however, insisted upon 
participating in the dialogue over how and where the freeway would be 
reconstructed to prevent the mistakes of the past from being repeated. Negotiations among Caltrans, the City of Oakland, and West Oakland community 
groups over the project design led to a number of additional community benefits. 
Caltrans used environmental justice practices to address the needs and concerns 
of this low-income and minority community in the planning, design, and 
construction of this complex and controversial project. Through these practices, 
the freeway that once split the heart of the community was rerouted and West 
Oakland was physically reunited. The highlighting of neighborhood history and culture is one of the 
environmental justice practices in this project. It is of direct interest to 
connecting archeology and civic engagement. An important and long-lasting part 
of mitigation of the impacts of the freeway and freeway construction on local 
residents was to ensure that the community benefited in meaningful ways from the 
project. Caltrans, working with Sonoma State University, developed an innovative 
and extensive archeological project, excavating sites along the freeway 
right-of-way. One example of the findings is the artifact assemblages from 
households of former African American railroad porters. This material became 
part of a traveling exhibit on African American labor history in West Oakland 
sponsored by Caltrans. Museums and Engaged Community: The Alutiiq Museum and Archeological 
Repository Kodiak, a large island located in Gulf of Alaska, has been the traditional 
homeland of the Alutiiq Nation for thousands of years. Efforts to recognize the 
importance of historical and contemporary Alutiiq culture by the community have 
resulted in a highly successful museum. The Alutiiq Museum makes a conscious 
effort to be an avenue for the public to learn about Alutiiq culture and to 
provide means for active engagement in the study and preservation of the 
island's material culture. Started when the Kodiak Area Native Association's (KANA) Culture and Heritage 
program received some of the Exxon Valdez oil spill cleanup funds, the museum 
and archeological repository collects and preserves archeological, ethnographic, 
and archival materials from Kodiak and other Alaskan Gulf Coast areas. It is a 
state-of-the-art public facility that is jointly governed by eight Alutiiq 
organizations. Furthermore, the museum serves as a cultural center, bringing the community 
together and increasing civic engagement. People gather there for contemporary 
cultural events and to experience the past of their island. Also, the museum 
runs a vibrant community archeology program that allows community members to 
actively participate in the archeological process, not just excavation, but 
preserving and interpreting materials. The success of the Alutiiq museum as a resource for the study and 
preservation of material culture as well as a vehicle for cultural continuity 
and community bonding is a great example of archeology playing a role in the 
civic renewal of a community.  Applying a Civic Engagement Framework: Starting the Dialogue It is important to realize that civic engagement takes a lot of time and 
effort. It also requires a commitment to effective and ongoing communication and 
a willingness to change some practices, including perhaps some that are familiar 
and comfortable. Civic dialogue techniques for public involvement such as face to face 
communication, dialogue, deliberation, and public conversation are widely used 
in civic engagement. For example, each member site of the International 
Coalition of Sites of Conscience offers different tools for learning exchanges, 
including public dialogue programs to engage visitors. McCoy and Scully (2002:117) consider the question, �What kind of public talk 
is most likely to expand civic engagement and make it meaningful to all sorts of 
people?� They propose integrating some techniques and advocate �Deliberative 
Dialogue.� They want to create connections between community organizing and 
deliberative dialogue to create wide contexts for conversation so that the 
conversations have an impact on public life for community building and public 
problem solving. They offer 10 principles for successful public engagement 
(2002:120): Encourage multiple forms of speech and communication to ensure that all 
  kinds of people have a real voice.Make listening as important as speaking.Connect personal experience with public issues.Build trust and create a foundation for working relationships.Explore a range of views about the nature of the issue. Provide adequate 
  time and appropriate sequence and structure. After an initial session, set up 
  study circles to examine �how is this issue affecting our community?�, �what 
  is the nature of the problem?�, �what are the root causes of the problem?�, 
  and then subsequently �What should we do about the problem?� in an action 
  forum.Encourage analysis and reasoned argument. It is not enough to have 
  dialogue that connects people; there need to be opportunities for critical 
  listening and earnest decision making. Face the volatile emotions and work 
  through them.Help people develop public judgment and create common ground for action.Provide a way for people to see themselves as actors and to be actors.Connect to government, policymaking and governance.Create ongoing processes, not isolated events. McCoy and Scully are proponents of the Study Circle Resource Center created 
by the Paul J. Aicher (formerly Topsfield) Foundation in 1989. There are many 
organizations with civic engagement programs and many success stories and 
cautionary tales among them. The following resources provide some tools, 
techniques, ideas, and further information.  Resources The information provided here is but a small fraction of the available 
literature, just as the examples given are but a sample of the possibilities for 
making archeology a positive force for civic engagement. It is up to each 
individual archeologist to rise above the standards set by law and make long 
term commitments to using the process and products of the archeological endeavor 
as tools for the well being of our communities. Case Study web sites Archeology 
of Ransom Place Harvard 
Yard Archeology Project The Dexter Siteat Independence National Historical Park The African Burial 
Ground Federal Highway Administration (2002) Cypress 
Freeway Replacement Project, California Department of Transportation Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University (2004) Putting 
the �There� There: Historical Archaeologies of West Oakland The 
Alutiiq Museum and Archeological Repository Further Resources Civic 
Practices NetworkThe Civic Practices Network (CPN) is a collaborative 
and nonpartisan project that brings together a diverse array of organizations 
and perspectives within the civic renewal movement. Diversity 
Resources See *Diversity Connections: A National Inventory* 
(Winter 2004-2005) for examples of how cultural resource programs, including 
archeology, include the diverse population of America. Environmental 
Protection Agency This site contains summaries of nearly forty 
evaluations and reports focused on the public involvement activities of EPA and 
other agencies. Each summary is searchable by environmental topic, and describes 
the focus of the evaluation, data collection methods, and key findings and 
recommendations. The 
George Wright SocietyThe �Forum� Journal 2002 Volume 19, Number 4 
*Civic Engagement at Sites of Conscience* (Guest Editor: Martin Blatt) is 
available here for free downloading. Articles include: Introduction: The National Park Service and Civic Engagement (Martin 
Blatt) Interpreting Slavery and Civil Rights at Fort Sumter (John Tucker) Frankly, Scarlett, We Do Give a Damn: The Making of a New National Park 
(Laura Gates) Civic Engagement with the Community at Washita Battlefield National Historic 
Site (Sarah Craighead) The National Park Service: Groveling Syncophant or Social Conscience? Telling 
the Story of Mountains, Valley, and Barbed Wire at Manzanar National Historic 
Site (Frank Hays) Activating the Past for Civic Action: the International Coalition of Historic 
Sites of Conscience (Liz Sevcenko) Dialogue Between Continents: Civic Engagement and the Gulag Museum at 
Perm-36, Russia (Louis P. Hutchins and Gay E. Vietzke) International 
Coalition of Sites of ConscienceThis site interprets history through 
historic sites that stimulate dialogue on pressing social issues and promote 
humanitarian and democratic values. It also shares opportunities for public 
involvement in issues raised at the sites. National Park Service Civic 
Engagement website This site provides 
background, policies, case studies, and more. National Park 
Service Community Tool Box Learn about working 
in and with communities to accomplish shared goals with the Community Tool Box 
developed by The Northeast Region's Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance 
(RTCA) Program. Natural Resources Conservation Service: Resource Conservation and 
Development (RC&D) Program Many projects funded by RC&D focus on 
cultural heritage, including archeology. According to the Department of 
Agriculture, the purpose of the RC&D program is to accelerate the 
conservation, development and utilization of natural resources, improve the 
general level of economic activity, and to enhance the environment and standard 
of living in designated RC&D areas. It improves capabilities to plan, 
develop and carry out programs for resource conservation and development. The 
program establishes or improves coordination systems in rural areas, engaging 
State, tribal and local units of government and local nonprofit organizations. 
Current program objectives focus on improvement of quality of life achieved 
through natural resources conservation and community development which leads to 
sustainable communities, prudent use (development), and the management and 
conservation of natural resources. RC&D areas are locally sponsored areas 
designated by the Secretary of Agriculture for RC&D technical and financial 
assistance program funds. The Public 
Benefits of Archeology This site 
highlights various publics and how they may benefit from archeology. Study 
Circles Resources CenterThis center provides technical assistance to 
communities that want to organize study circles.  References Cited Boggs, Carl2001 Social Capital and Political Fantasy: Robert 
Putnam's *Bowling Alone.* Theory and Society 30(2): 281-297 Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip and T. J. Ferguson (editors)2008 
Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities. 
AltaMira Press, Lanham, MD. Derry, Linda and Maureen Malloy (editors)2003 Archaeologists 
and Local Communities: Partners in Exploring the Past. Society for American 
Archaeology, Washington, DC. Dinkins, David1994 Preface. In Reclaiming Our Past, Honoring 
Our Ancestors: New York's 18th-Century African Burial Ground and the Memorial 
Competition, edited by Edward Kaufman. African Burial Ground Competition 
Coalition, NY (quoted in LaRoche and Blakey 1997:100). Dongoske, Kurt, Mark Aldenderfer and Karen Doehner 
(editors)2000 Working Together: Native Americans and 
Archaeologists. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, DC. Ehrlich, Thomas (editor)2000 Civic Responsibility and Higher 
Education. Oryx Press. Franklin, John Hope2000 Keynote Address: 
Cultural Resource Stewardship. Discovery 2000: The National Park Service 
General Conference, September 11-15, 2000. St. Louis, MO. Jeppson, Patrice L. and George Brauer.�Hey Did You Hear about that 
Teacher Who Took the Class Out to Dig a Site: Some Common Misconceptions about 
Archaeology in Schools.� In Archaeologists and Local Communities: Partners in 
Exploring the Past, edited by Linda Derry and Maureen Malloy. Society for 
American Archaeology, Washington, DC. LaRoche, Cheryl J. and Michael L. Blakey1997 Seizing 
Intellectual Power: The Dialogue at the New York African Burial Ground. 
Historical Archaeology 31(3):84-106. Little, Barbara J., Paul A. Shackel (editors)2007 
Archaeology as a Tool of Civil Engagement. Altamira, Lanham, MD. Marshall, Yvonne (editor) 2002 Community Archaeology. 
Thematic Issue of World Archaeology 34(2). McCoy, Martha L. and Patrick L. Scully2002 Deliberative 
Dialogue to Expand Civic Engagement: What kind of talk does democracy need? 
National Civic Review 91 (2). Mullins, Paul R.2004 The Invisible Landscape; An Archaeology 
of Urban Renewal and the Color Line. The SAA Archaeological Record 
4(4):25-28. National Park System Advisory Board2001 Rethinking the National Parks for 
the 21st Century. A Report of the National Park System Advisory Board. Putnam, Robert D.2000 Bowling Alone; The collapse and 
revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York. Saguaro Seminar [Saguaro Seminar on Civic Engagement in 
America]2000 BetterTogether. 
John F. Kennedy School of Governement, Harvard University, Cambridge. Shackel, Paul A. and Erve Chambers (editors)2004 Places in 
Mind: Public Archeology as Applied Anthropology. Routledge, New York. Skocpol, Theda.1996 �Unravelling From Above,� *The 
American Prospect.* no. 25: 20-25 Society for American Archaeology 1996 Principles 
of Archaeological Ethics. Washington, DC. Stubbs, John, Patricia Capone, Christina J. Hodge, and Diana D. 
Loren.in press �Campus Archaeology at Harvard University, 
Cambridge, Massachusetts.� In Beneath the Ivory Tower, the Archaeology of 
Academia, edited by Russel Skowronek. Swidler, Nina, K. Dongoske, R. Anyon, and A. Downer 
(editors)1997 Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping 
Stones to Common Ground. AltaMira, Walnut Creek, CA. WAC [World Archaeological Congress] 1990 First 
Code of Ethics, adopted by WAC Council at Barquisimeto, Venezuela Acknowledgements Barbara Little would like to thank Tanner Amdur-Clark, who dedicated his 
internship during June 2008 to reviving this technical brief, updating it, and 
adding the case study on Harvard Yard as well as additional resources. We are 
grateful to both internal NPS reviewers, including Jodi Barnes, Terry Childs, 
Marcia Keener, Francis P. McManamon, Teresa Moyer, and Karen Mudar, and 
additional peer reviewers who have helped us improve this technical brief: Sarah 
Bridges, Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Laura Galke, and T. J. Ferguson. This 
November edition is the correct edition and supercedes the September draft, 
which was online briefly. Technical Briefs
 What is 
  Civic Engagement?What is 
  Social Capital?Why 
  Get Involved in Civic Engagement?How 
  Can Archeology Contribute to Civic Engagement?ExamplesApplying 
  a Civic Engagement Framework: Starting the DialogueResourcesReferences 
  Citedtechnical 
  briefs index


DOIHistory & CultureSearchContactFOIAPrivacyDisclaimerUSA.gov





archeology in the 
  parksarcheology 
  nationwideprofessional 
  toolsfor the 
  publickennewick manthe 
  antiquities actwhat's new


technical 
  assistancedatabasesstandards & 
  guidelinestraining 
  & educationreportspublications


featureslearn and 
  participatefor teachers