Collaborative activities and research offer an opportunity to achieve deeper levels of engagement with a project, sometimes referred to as a ‘bottom-up’ approach. Archaeology can offer many opportunities for participants to be ‘co-producers’ of the outputs. This might be working together to excavate and record an archaeological feature, undertaking landscape survey as part of a community mapping project, or working together to create a heritage trail or co-curated exhibition. The audience becomes part of the delivery team and contributes their time and energy to support the delivery of the project. Collaborative engagement also enables strong partnerships to be made on different levels, with individual participants and with organisations like locally based groups, trusts or charities.
Co-design in heritage projects is often seen as the ‘gold star’ of community engagement as it integrates the highest possible level of collaboration between professionals and members of the public. It asks projects to share the power of decision making with multiple stakeholders, trying to integrate the needs and wants of community groups into the heart of a project’s design. As you might expect, this can be challenging, particularly for professionals who will have to relinquish some control and be receptive to views that might be different or contradictory to the ones they currently hold. In these approaches, we might see the role of a heritage professional less as an ‘expert’ voice who has authority to make decisions and instead more of as someone who helps generate a space for differing groups of people to come together to build a project collaboratively. Our expertise and experience can be used to guide a sense of what is possible and feasible, providing structure to ideas, and bringing technical or project management skills into a project.
It's important to note that although we may see a co-designed project as the pinnacle of a spectrum of engagement, the communities we work with may not always want or need this from us. Collaborative and co-design approaches may not always be ‘the best’ way of undertaking a community project, so instead see it as simply one option across a project’s spectrum of engagement.
Considerations for collaborative and co-design forms of engagement:
- resource investment: collaborative engagement is not a way to transfer the workload to another party; it will need significant team time for project planning, training activities and leadership, as well as ongoing mentoring and support, and dialogue with audience groups.
- participation level: across the spectrum of participation in community engagement, collaborative and co-design activities sit at the higher levels of participation. Collaborative research such as co-production is designed for us to collaborate, develop partnerships, and work closely with individuals and groups to deliver a common task. More involved levels, including co-design, can empower a specific project audience to help shape and develop a project.
- audience engagement: collaborative research can involve reasonably large audience numbers depending on the size of the project and timescales available, but will often be delivered to smaller groups at one time. Deeper participation such as co-designed projects tend to target smaller audience groups and involve a long timescale for delivery to build good working relationships with participants.
- impact measurement: activities can be evaluated using both qualitative and quantitative data, collected before, during and following the event. Evaluation methodology should be planned well in advance and should consider benefits for communities beyond the project.
Community based excavation/discovery in the trenches
Many people who choose to participate in an excavation will often speak about the deep connection they feel with the past through having the opportunity to be a real part of the process of discovery – even when there isn’t all that much to be discovered. The anticipation of what could be found, being in the great outdoors and the sense of camaraderie that stems from working as part of a larger team also feature highly on the list of reasons participants enjoy opportunities such as getting involved in excavation. To run an effective and rewarding participatory archaeology activity, the process, skills, methods and teamwork are all part of the experience, alongside the features, finds and impressive sections.
Health and safety issues are frequently cited as reasons not to involve the public with excavation, and this may well be a problem for some development sites. Any project will require a full risk assessment and clear health and safety briefing in advance of the activity; working with the community should be delivered to the same professional level as with any other team. Bringing people together poses other potential issues and a zero-tolerance policy towards bullying or dangerous behaviour can be a helpful tool for ensuring the safety of everyone on site and mitigating risk to organisations and sites.
In terms of outputs and outcomes, training participants to different extents can provide excellent results. Digging for a day or taking part for six weeks will each produce recordable learning outcomes, and using existing frameworks for skills can be rewarding for everyone involved. The Archaeology Skills Passport provides a well-established and easy-to-use format for anyone learning new skills, with the added advantage that most archaeology organisations are aware of the scheme and the participant can carry their new skills from site to site.
Project examples
- Archaeology skills passport: Website
- DigVentures, Pontefract castle: Website and Evaluation article
- York Archaeology, Archaeology on Prescription: Website
- Cotswold Archaeology, Gloucester Greyfriars Community Archaeology Project: Website
Training volunteers and citizen science
Archaeology utilises skills and methods of practice from a vast array of disciplines: social science, natural sciences, digital technologies, mapping, and historical/desk-based research, to name a few.
This presents an opportunity for archaeology to be a mechanism for training in highly transferrable skills, which provide benefits for people of all ages; young people can learn skills that they are able to take into the workplace, and for adults new skills are beneficial for a variety of reasons at all stages of life.
Projects can be run as in-person training followed by self-led research or delivered entirely online. Larger-scale projects can develop into a citizen science project, which harnesses the power and curiosity of large audiences to improve archaeological data collection and make use of under-utilised or overlooked data sets.
Training volunteers and citizen scientists to undertake heritage research is mutually beneficial; volunteers learn important skills, and organisations benefit from the volunteer hours and local knowledge. Additionally, it allows the potential to train the archaeological workforce of the future, as well as embedding ‘train the trainer’ skills in the existing workforce. It’s important that volunteers undertaking tasks such as heritage research are given as much supervision, ongoing mentorship, and guidance as they would be if they were working alongside professional archaeologists in the trench – it’s easy to forget that research is a skill and can be hard work.
Project examples
- SCAPE Trust, SCHARP Project: Webpage
- Mesolithic Deeside: Project webpage and guidance document (PDF)
- HES – understanding the value of volunteering: Downloadable report
- DigVentures, Deep Time: Webpage
- MOLA and CITiZAN: Webpage
- Exploring co-production in community heritage research: Reflections from the Bennachie Landscapes Project: Journal article
- Lifelong Learning in Lockdown: an online archaeology project with people living with dementia: Webpage
Additional resources
- NVQ Archaeological Practice: Webpage
- National Occupational Standards (NOS): Webpage
- Continuing Professional Development (CPD): Webpage
Co-designed heritage projects
For this toolkit, we’re defining co-design as being different from co-production in that the former is more about the first stages of a project: putting the collaborative partner(s) at the heart of the project from the outset. When collaborative participation at this level is appropriate for your project, it will typically feel more like a grassroots venture; a delivery team might work alongside local history or archaeology societies or interest groups, a school or college, a local museum or simply a group of members of the community.
Co-designed projects can foster ownership within the community and can help to create lasting and meaningful legacies for the project. By co-designing a heritage project, outcomes will create added value, ensuring that voices within the community and from those who will benefit from the project are heard and understood. This ensures that the project is designed to achieve outcomes that are useful for the community, not just for the project.
There are not many examples of co-designed archaeology projects to signpost. However, national policies and funding streams are starting to prompt new work. Historic England’s recent initiative has provided funding to support co-design of everyday heritage projects exploring working lives through heritage. The results of these will provide an excellent resource of inspiration for those wishing to embed co-design practice in archaeology.
Further reading
- Historic England, Everyday Heritage Grants: News release
- Co-design within and between Communities in Cultural Heritage: Journal Article
- Department for Communities, Northern Ireland, Culture, Arts and Heritage Strategy: Webpage
- Co-design case study: digital heritage inspires the Pacific: Webpage
- Beyond Sticky Notes – a guide to co-design: Webpage
The Archaeology Skills Passport is a tool that records an individual's skills, qualifications, and experiences in the field of archaeology. It serves as a comprehensive record of an archaeologist's professional development and competencies. The passport is often used within the archaeological community to demonstrate the breadth and depth of an individual's archaeological knowledge and expertise.
In co-design, designers and participants work together as equal partners, sharing their knowledge, ideas, and perspectives. The process often includes various activities such as workshops, ideas and design sessions and user research. Through these collaborative efforts, the aim is to co-create opportunities and solutions that meet the needs, aspirations, and preferences of the users.
Co-producers, in a broad sense, refer to individuals or groups who actively collaborate and contribute to the creation, development, or implementation of a project, initiative, or outcome. They are actively involved as partners, sharing responsibilities, decision-making authority, and resources.
Empowerment refers to the process of enabling individuals or groups to gain control, authority, and confidence in their own lives, actions, and decision-making. It involves providing the necessary resources, knowledge, skills, and support to individuals or communities, allowing them to make choices, take action, and effectively address challenges or pursue opportunities.
Qualitative and quantitative are two distinct approaches to research and data analysis, often used in combination, to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic or project. They differ in their methods, data types, and analytical techniques. Qualitative research provides rich, detailed insights into the subjective experiences of an audience. Quantitative research provides data to enable statistical analysis and generalisability. Combining both approaches provides a comprehensive and balanced understanding of the project impacts and outcomes.
