Participatory mapping and UAV photogrammetry as complementary techniques for landscape archaeology studies: an example from north‐western Argentina

Larraín, Alina Álvarez; Greco, Catriel; Tarragó, Myriam N.

doi:10.1002/arp.1794

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This helps to restructure the power dynamics involved with remote sensing technologies and avoid a panopticon-esque organization with outside researchers controlling all aspects of data collection and analysis. This notion of mutual benefit is central to many participatory mapping approaches in geography and anthropology (e.g., Alvarez Larrain et al, 2020;Colloredo-Mansfeld et al, 2020;Dunn, 2007;King, 2002;Ramirez-Gomez et al, 2015). By involving local communities in mapping projects that utilize GIS and remote sensing, research is inherently on track to adhere to many ethical standards such as providing benefits to local communities ( Alvarez Larrain et al, 2020;Ehrman-Solberg et al, 2020;Larrain & McCall, 2019;Sanchez et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This notion of mutual benefit is central to many participatory mapping approaches in geography and anthropology (e.g., Alvarez Larrain et al, 2020;Colloredo-Mansfeld et al, 2020;Dunn, 2007;King, 2002;Ramirez-Gomez et al, 2015). By involving local communities in mapping projects that utilize GIS and remote sensing, research is inherently on track to adhere to many ethical standards such as providing benefits to local communities ( Alvarez Larrain et al, 2020;Ehrman-Solberg et al, 2020;Larrain & McCall, 2019;Sanchez et al, 2021). For example, participatory mapping has alleviated conflicts among groups over resources (e.g., Kwaku Kyem, 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The aerial panopticon and the ethics of archaeological remote sensing in sacred cultural spaces

Davis

Buffa

Rasolondrainy

et al. 2021

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Remote sensing technology has become a standard tool for archaeological prospecting. Yet the ethical guidelines associated with the use of these technologies are not well established and are even less-often discussed in published literature.With a nearly unobstructed view of large geographic spaces, aerial and spaceborne remote sensing technology creates an asymmetrical power dynamic between observers and the observed. Here, we explore the power dynamics involved with aerial and spaceborne remote sensing, using Foucault's notion of power and the panopticon. In many other areas of archaeological practice, such power imbalances have been actively confronted by collaborative approaches and community engagement, but remote sensing archaeology has been largely absent from such interventions. We discuss how aerial and spaceborne imagery is perceived by local communities in southwest Madagascar and advocate for a more collaborative approach to remote sensing archaeology that includes local stakeholders and researchers in all levels of data acquisition, analysis, and dissemination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The aerial panopticon and the ethics of archaeological remote sensing in sacred cultural spaces

Davis

Buffa

Rasolondrainy

et al. 2021

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the same time, drone technology is also increasingly being brought by academics and NGOs to villages and indigenous communities to carry out participatory mapping (Álvarez Larrain et al, 2021;Colloredo-Mansfeld et al, 2020;Paneque-Gálvez et al, 2014;Radjawali & Pye, 2017). This type of research, however, has not provided insights into how communities interpret the application of ultra-high resolution drone imagery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoiding Mistakes in Drone Usage in Participatory Mapping: Methodological Considerations during the Pandemic

Naufal

Asriadi²,

Absar³

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory mapping has continued to evolve with the onset of new methodologies and technology. Conventional methods for sketching have now expanded to incorporate the use of drone imagery and other sophisticated mapping approaches as a base map. However, the use of ultra-high resolution drone imagery does not mean that it will facilitate more participatory processes nor improve the quality of data and uses of information. Indeed, it has long been known that ultra-high spatial resolution can cause misinterpretation. During COVID-19, innovations are emerging to apply more remote technologies in participatory mapping. Mobility concerns, requirements, and preferences for physical distancing discourages active participation of local communities and are especially complex in contexts involving Indigenous People. This paper specifically explores the mistakes that can arise from over-reliance on employing drones as a tool in participatory mapping methods. This paper is based on a case study of participatory mapping conducted at 43 villages (around forest area) of Central Sulawesi Province and West Sulawesi Province. The participatory mapping was carried out by the Sulawesi Community Foundation (SCF) from 2019-2021. The result of the study found at least six signs of potentially negative outcomes from the use of ultra-high resolution drone imagery, starting from disorientation, misperception over the periods of drone acquisition, homogeneous land cover conditions, similar types of plants, numerous signs of nature, and labeling affixed on map. We also encourage the development of ultra-high-resolution drone imagery to take place under certain conditions and see its role as an interpretation dictionary or as a targeted tool in local contexts. In addition, we found that the level of active participation in participatory mapping during the Pandemic was higher than before the pandemic but requires some improvisations in meeting design

show abstract

“…With the rapid development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) technology, the past two decades have seen various applications of UAVs in many fields, e.g., infrastructure monitoring [1,2], safety inspection [3][4][5][6], delivery of healthcare [7], agricultural [8,9], archaeology [10][11][12][13], remote sensing [14][15][16][17][18][19], environmental quality monitoring [20][21][22][23], geological prospecting [24][25][26][27], and unexploded ordnance (UXO) detection [28][29][30][31][32]. The significant advance of UAV hardware design [33] and mission planning [34] makes it a platform for cross-industry applications [35].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure13. Removal of multi-rotor interference using a two channel LTI model based on the signal correlation (modified from[90]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Magnetic Surveys: A Review on Platform Selection and Interference Suppression

Zheng

Xing

et al. 2021

Drones

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past two decades, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used in many scientific research fields for various applications. In particular, the use of UAVs for magnetic surveys has become a hot spot and is expected to be actively applied in the future. A considerable amount of literature has been published on the use of UAVs for magnetic surveys, however, how to choose the platform and reduce the interference of UAV to the collected data have not been discussed systematically. There are two primary aims of this study: (1) To ascertain the basis of UAV platform selection and (2) to investigate the characteristics and suppression methods of UAV magnetic interference. Systematic reviews were performed to summarize the results of 70 academic studies (from 2005 to 2021) and outline the research tendencies for applying UAVs in magnetic surveys. This study found that multi-rotor UAVs have become the most widely used type of UAVs in recent years because of their advantages such as easiness to operate, low cost, and the ability of flying at a very low altitude, despite their late appearance. With the improvement of the payload capacity of UAVs, to use multiple magnetometers becomes popular since it can provide more abundant information. In addition, this study also found that the most commonly used method to reduce the effects of the UAV’s magnetic interference is to increase the distance between the sensors and the UAV, although this method will bring about other problems, e.g., the directional and positional errors of sensors caused by erratic movements, the increased risk of impact to the magnetometers. The pros and cons of different types of UAV, magnetic interference characteristics and suppression methods based on traditional aeromagnetic compensation and other methods are discussed in detail. This study contributes to the classification of current UAV applications as well as the data processing methods in magnetic surveys.

show abstract

Participatory mapping and UAV photogrammetry as complementary techniques for landscape archaeology studies: an example from north‐western Argentina

Cited by 15 publications

References 37 publications

The aerial panopticon and the ethics of archaeological remote sensing in sacred cultural spaces

The aerial panopticon and the ethics of archaeological remote sensing in sacred cultural spaces

Avoiding Mistakes in Drone Usage in Participatory Mapping: Methodological Considerations during the Pandemic

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Magnetic Surveys: A Review on Platform Selection and Interference Suppression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About