Svalbard's cultural heritage sites are important remnants of an international history in the High North. Cultural heritage in the Arctic is being impacted by climate and environmental change as well as increased human activity. Tourism is a potential cause of transformation in cultural heritage sites, such as increased wear and tear, creation of paths and traces as people walk through cultural environments. Cultural heritage management is therefore an increasingly challenging endeavor as management authorities must take under consideration multiple impacts and threats to cultural heritage sites in a changing environment. Based on research conducted in Svalbard from 2014 to 2016 on methods for long-term systematic cultural heritage monitoring, this paper will discuss dilemmas for a sustainable use and management of vulnerable cultural heritage sites in the Arctic.

What can remote sensing contribute to archaeological surveying in subarctic and arctic landscapes? The pros and cons of remote sensing data vary as do areas of utilization and methodological approaches. We assessed the applicability of remote sensing for archaeological surveying of northern landscapes using airborne laser scanning (LiDAR) and satellite and aerial images to map archaeological features as a basis for a) assessing the pros and cons of the different approaches and b) assessing the potential detection rate of remote sensing. Interpretation of images and a LiDAR-based bare-earth digital terrain model (DTM) was based on visual analyses aided by processing and visualizing techniques. 368 features were identified in the aerial images, 437 in the satellite images and 1186 in the DTM. LiDAR yielded the better result, especially for hunting pits. Image data proved suitable for dwellings and settlement sites. Feature characteristics proved a key factor for detectability, both in LiDAR and image data. This study has shown that LiDAR and remote sensing image data are highly applicable for archaeological surveying in northern landscapes. It showed that a multi-sensor approach contributes to high detection rates. Our results have improved the inventory of archaeological sites in a non-destructive and minimally invasive manner.

Archaeologists produce and communicate authorized stories concerning cultural heritage and the past. Their legitimacy is based on education, scientific methods and their connection with a research community. Their position as authorized producers of history is also emphasized by TV programmes presenting archaeologists as riddle-solving detectives. The main aim of this article is to focus on the dynamics between stories communicated by archaeologists and the stories pass- ed on and communicated by members of a local community, and to discuss these. What happens when stories based on tradition and lore meet authorized stories? The latter sometimes overwrite or erase local lore and knowledge connected to features in the landscape. Some archaeological projects have, however, involved local participants and locally based knowledge. In addition, one should be aware that local and traditional knowledge are sometimes kept and transmitted within a family, local community or ethnic group. Local knowledge is therefore not always a resource that is accessible for archaeologists.

No abstract