# 

###### 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 /www.nps.gov/history/nr/twhp/descrip.htm">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       Site  at 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 Network      The 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 Society      The “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 Conscience      This 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 Center      This 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 Hope2000Keynote       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 Board2001Rethinking       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? 
      -  Examples 
      -  Applying a Civic Engagement Framework: Starting         the Dialogue 
      -  Resources 
      -  References Cited 
      -  technical briefs index 

    -  DOI 
    -  History & Culture 
    -  Search 
    -  Contact 
    -  FOIA 
    -  Privacy 
    -  Disclaimer 
    -  USA.gov 

    - archeology       in the parks  
    - archeology       nationwide  
    - professional       tools  
    - for       the public  
    - kennewick       man
    - the       antiquities act
    - what's       new

    -  
    -  
    - technical assistance
    - databases
    - standards & guidelines
    - training & education
    - reports
    - publications

    -  
    -  
    -  
    - features
    - learn and participate
    - for teachers