How do cultural heritage professionals responsibly manage and preserve the ever-growing body of digital objects generated across cultural heritage research?

These concerns, also known as the digital curation crisis, are being faced by an increasing number of data producers and preservationists across the field.

Digital curation, the process of collecting, managing and preserving digital objects, is essential due to more and more digital tools, such as GIS, 3D scanning, drones and photogrammetry, being incorporated into cultural heritage research that produce large amounts of information. Cultural heritage, which refers to the legacy of a group of society, can include tangible items like physical artifacts or intangible things like traditions and language that are inherited from the past.

In order to ensure long-term preservation of digital objects, proper planning is needed to prevent files from becoming inaccessible, outdated or lost for future reuse. Similarly as museums and archaeological repositories preserve physical artifacts for future generations, digital curation ensures records, images, maps and datasets remain usable and available to future researchers, communities and the public.

In a recent journal article published in Advances in Archaeological Practice, a team of researchers with partners at the University of Georgia and Arizona State University sought to address these concerns through offering shared terminology and actionable guidance on how to improve long-term stewardship of cultural heritage data.

“It is vitally important that we as a discipline recognize that digital curation and preservation is not optional but rather a core stewardship obligation” said Dr. Amanda Roberts Thompson, lead author and clinical associate professor at the University of Georgia’s Department of Anthropology, and the director of the Laboratory of Archaeology.

The team of researchers was inspired to formulate guidelines by a growing concern across the archaeology, historic preservation, and museum fields that digital information is being created faster than it is being responsibly preserved. “Like the curation crisis that is so familiar to cultural heritage professionals, the digital curation crisis is a predictable consequence of treating preservation as an afterthought rather than a foundational responsibility of stewardship” said Roberts Thompson.

“We recognize that many professionals want to care for digital materials in a similar fashion as physical artifacts but often lack clear guidance, shared terminology, or institutional support,” said Christopher Nicholson, co-author of the study and associate research professor at ASU’s School of Human Evolution and Social Change and director of the school’s Center for Digital Antiquity. “We wanted to create a practical and accessible framework that helps people understand the ‘digital curation crisis’ and provides realistic steps for improving long-term stewardship of cultural heritage data.”

The article discusses seven recommendations for cultural heritage professionals needing guidance for actionable steps toward improving their digital preservation practices. The authors shared that the recommendations grew out of years of the team’s professional experience across museums, repositories, archaeology and digital preservation, as well as conversations within the Society for American Archaeology’s Curation Interest Group and existing best-practice literature. The team wanted to address common challenges and provide recommendations that were practical, flexible and scalable for institutions with differing levels of funding and expertise and can be implemented immediately.

Alongside these recommendations, the authors emphasize the importance in including Indigenous and descendent communities in conversations regarding cultural heritage data, as they have been historically excluded from decisions about how information related to their heritage is collected, interpreted, stored and shared.

“Including these communities helps ensure that cultural heritage data are managed ethically, respectfully, and in ways that align with community values, cultural protocols and data sovereignty rights,” said Nicholson. “Their involvement also strengthens preservation efforts by bringing important perspectives, knowledge and priorities into decisions about access, reuse and long-term stewardship of cultural heritage materials.”

Moving forward, the authors see the biggest challenge facing cultural heritage professionals today as the exponential amount of digital data being produced, while funding, staffing, infrastructure and training for long-term preservation struggles to keep pace. The ongoing costs and technical expertise required to responsibly manage digital archives, alongside rapidly changing technologies requiring upfront preservation planning creates increasing difficulties for the field, but the authors say it is solvable.

“The path forward will not be perfect and will not look the same for all cultural heritage professionals; however, intentional and incremental steps taken collectively across disciplines can make impacts. We hope that these recommendations will be the start of embedding actionable practices regarding digital preservation” said Roberts Thompson.