Cultural sites, traditional knowledge and participatory mapping : Long-term land use in a Sámi community in coastal Norway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge held by people who have been involved in intimate and direct engagement with their land is often valuable for our understanding of past land use. This study has through an interdisciplinary approach explored the possible benefits of emphasizing local knowledge, local participation and the increasing possibilities within digital media, seen from an archaeological viewpoint. The study areas are two areas in Finnmark County in North Norway and one comparative study from the west coast of British Colombia, Canada.\nDue to Norway’s "nation building" project and its focus on one Norwegian history and heritage, the Sami past was of little interest to archaeology through much of the twentieth century. It was not until around 1980 the research on Sámi culture and history became significant in academia. Parallel to this shift several legal changes led to an increasing demand for knowledge of Sami land use and cultural history. Despite this shift I argue that there still is a need for base data to meet Norway’s obligations and aims. In addition these comprehensive landscapes and many knowledgeable people represent a unique potential to gain new knowledge and for sharing knowledge. \nThis thesis has put the use of Participatory GIS into practice within archaeological research and explored alternative ways to combine archaeology, participatory work and the existing flexibility in GIS to increase spatial knowledge and facilitate useful ways to share it to the benefit of cultural heritage management, researchers and local communities. I have shown how an interdisciplinary approach can lead to more effective archaeological surveying and consequently a more sustainable cultural heritage management. The approach has shown a potential to facilitate inter-thematic needs through the software’s flexibility. It can help fill the increasing knowledge gap between a mature population with intimate land use knowledge and the younger generations. Also by combining documented visible features with the transcribed georeferenced traditional knowledge into a GIS, the extent and intensity of land use emerges more complete and comprehensible. The value of involving local knowledge is exemplified, and shows how oral traditions and traditional knowledge can help archaeologists to contextualize and comprehend their findings in a given landscape.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".