Archaeology in Serbia Facing the Challenges of Digital Colonialism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v20i3.4Keywords:
digital colonialism, data colonialism, digital archaeology, ethicsAbstract
The paper deals with the phenomenon of digital colonialism and its reflections in Serbian archaeology. This is the current form of global inequalities, characterized by imposing technological domination over the countries of the Global South, most frequently from the part of big Western corporations. These companies, by controlling hardware, software, and cyber data, impose new colonial mechanisms to the developing countries, establishing a system benefiting their financial interests that can have catastrophic consequences upon the sovereignty of the Global South. The paper offers a short overview of the history of scholarly and political thoughts on the subject of technological inequalities, and the emergence of the global initiatives for technological rights. Various forms of digital colonialism in archaeology are discussed, ranging from the issue of access to technical equipment, the engagement of foreign experts, to data control. The examples of Belize and Syria are presented, illustrating the dependent positions of archaeologists in the countries of the Global South. The emergence of digital colonialism is then discussed in the context of the archaeological practice in Serbia, identifying the potentially problematic circumstances, such as insufficiently precise legislative regulation in the domain of cooperation with the foreign institutions, as well as the issue of data access and ethics of data storage. The large infrastructural projects and the presence of foreign investors raise concerns in respect to data access of local experts, as explained in the example of foreign companies present in Serbia. Since this is the first text treating digital colonialism in Serbian archaeology, a more detailed scrutiny of the problem is strongly advocated. For the time being, it is possible to call for digital decolonization of archaeology in Serbia, achievable first of all through investments in infrastructure, usage of open code software, and a more precise legal framework. The empowerment of the local scholars in this respect is key to achieving the technological autonomy of the profession, since only the responsible management of information technologies may secure the digital sovereignty of archaeology.
Downloads
References
Aleksić, Aleksandar. 2023. „Zaštita arheološkog nasleđa, prostorno planiranje i razvoj u Srbiji“. U Preventivna arheologija i zaštita arheološkog nasleđa. Zbornik radova tematske sesije Sekcije za zaštitu arheološkog nasleđa, XLIV godišnji skup SAD, Paraćin, 2021. godina, uredio Aleksandar Aleksić, 211–241. Niš: Srpsko arheološko društvo i Zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture Niš.
Baletić, Katarina. 2021. „Na Kalemegdanu i betoniranje i 3D promocija spomenika“. Nova ekonomija 30. septembar 2021. https://novaekonomija.rs/vesti-iz-zemlje/na-kalemegdanu-i-betoniranje-i-3d-promocija-spomenika
Bon, Anna, Francis Saa-Dittoh, Gossa Lô, Monica Pini, Robert Bwana, Cheah Waishiang, Narayanan Kulathuramaiyer and André Baart. 2022. „Decolonizing Technology and Society: A Perspective from the Global South“. In Perspectives on Digital Humanism, edited by Hannes Werthner, Erich Prem, Edward A. Lee and Carlo Ghezzi, 61–68. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86144-5_9
Bori, Ana Maria. 2024. „Data colonialism: a contemporary manifestation of old practices or an oldfashioned term for a contemporary phenomenon?“. The bulletin of the Graduate School, Soka University 45: 211–244.
Bezuidenhout, Louise, Sabina Leonelli, Ann Kelly and Brian Rappert. 2017. „Beyond the digital divide: Towards a situated approach to open data“. Science and Public Policy 44: 464–475. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw036
Buchanan, Carrie. 2014. „Revisiting the UNESCO debate on a New World Information and Communication Order: Has the NWICO been achieved by other means?“. Telematics and Informatics 32: 391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.05.007
Buragohain, Dipima, Yahui Meng, Chaoqun Deng, Qirui Li and Sushank Chaudhary. 2024. „Digitalizing cultural heritage through metaverse applications: challenges, opportunities, and strategies“. Heritage Science 12: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-024-01403-1
Chase, Adrian, Diane Chase and Arlen Chase. 2020. „Ethics, New Colonialism, and Lidar Data: A Decade of Lidar in Maya Archaeology“. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology 3: 51–62. https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.43
Cohen, Anna S., Juan Carlos Fernandez-Diaz and Amanda Meeks. 2022. „Exploring the Nature of Authority Over, and Ownership of Data Generated by Archaeological Lidar Projects in Latin America“. Archaeologies 18: 558–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-022-09464-z
Couldry, Nick and Ulises A. Mejias. 2018. „Data Colonialism: Rethinking Big Data’s Relation to the Contemporary Subject“. Television & New Media 20 (4): 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632
Crnobrnja, Adam. 2020a. Kako sačuvati arheološko nasleđe – priručnik za lokalne samouprave, planere, donosioce odluka i druge zainteresovane. Beograd: Srpsko arheološko društvo.
Crnobrnja, Adam. 2020b. „Zaštita arheološkog nasleđa i učešće međunarodnih institucija na arheološkim istraživanjima u Republici Srbiji“. U XLIII Skupština i godišnji skup SAD, 88–89. Subotica: Srpsko arheološko društvo.
Đorđević, Dragana, Jovan Tadić, Branimir Grgur et al. 2024. „The influence of exploration activities of a potential lithium mine to the environment in Western Serbia“. Scientific Reports 14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-68072-9
Filipović, Vojislav, Aleksandar Bulatović and Rada Gligorić. 2022. „Mound 28 from the Paulje necropolis in Brezjak. A contribution to the absolute chronology of the Late Bronze Age in Serbia“. Starinar LXXII: 73–90. https://doi.org/10.2298/STA2272073F
Gupta, Neha and Ramona Nicholas. 2022. „Being Seen, Being Heard: Ownership of Archaeology and Digital Heritage“. Archaeologies 18: 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-022-09465-y
Hocking, Brian. 1985. „Words and Deeds: Why America Left Unesco?“. The World Today 41, No. 4, april 1985.
Ilić Mirković, Milena. 2021. „Kako je Rio Tinto uništio pećine Aboridžina“. Nova, 25. 4. 2021. https://nova.rs/vesti/drustvo/kako-je-rio-tinto-unistio-pecine-aboridzina/
Joselit, David. 2020. „How Western nations use the Arch of Palmyra and other symbols of Islamic heritage as political tools“. Artnet News, 21. 07. 2020. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/david-joselit-heritage-and-debt-1895594
Kwet, Michael. 2019. „Digital colonialism: US empire and the new imperialism in the Global South“. Race & Class 60 (4): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396818823172
Knežević, Ana. 2023. „Afrika onlajn u raljama digitalnog kolonijalizma“. U AFRIKA: književnost, jezik, kultura, poiltika, uredile Jelena Arsenijević-Mitrić i Nataša Rakić, 429–444. Kragujevac: Filološko-umetnički fakultet u Kragujevcu.
MacLeod, Roy. 1996. „Reading the Discourse of Colonial Science“. In Les Sciences hors d’Occident au XXeme siècle, vol. 2: Les Sciences coloniales: figures et institutions, edited by Patrick Petitjean, 87–98. Paris: ORSTOM.
McPhail, Tom. 1981. Electronic Colonialism: The Future of International Broadcasting and Communication. Newsbury Park: Sage Publications.
Mijajlovic, Žarko i Zoran Ognjanović. 2004. „Pregled nekih projekata digitalizacije u Srbiji“. Pregled Nacionalnog centra za digitalizaciju 4: 52–61.
Mladić, Damir. 2021. „Umjetna inteligencija i globalna raspodjela moći“. Međunarodne studije 21 (2): 113–125. https://doi.org/10.46672/ms.21.2.5
Muldoon, James and Boxi A. Wu. 2023. „Artificial Intelligence in the Colonial Matrix of Power“. Philosophy & Technology 36: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00687-8
Nakano, Ryoko. 2023. „A Geocultural Power Competition in UNESCO’s Silk Roads Project: China’s Initiatives and the Responses From Japan and South Korea“. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs 52 (2): 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681026221094054
Nelson S. 2021. „A dream deferred: UNESCO, American Expertise, and the eclipse of radical news development in the early satellite age“. Radical History Review 2021: 30–59. https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-9170696
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, Sabelo J. 2013. „Perhaps decoloniality is the answer? Critical reflections on development from a decolonial epistemic perspective: editorial“. Africanus 43 (2): 1–11.
Nothias, Toussaint. 2025. „An intellectual history of digital colonialism“. Journal of Communication 2025 (00): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaf003
Nordenstreng, Kaarle. 2011. „The New World Information and Communication Order: Testimony of an Actor“. In Widerworte. Philosophie Politik Kommunikation. Festschrift für Jörg Becker, edited by Frank Deppe, Wolfgang Meixner and Günter Pallaver, 227–237. Innsbruck: Innsbruck University Press.
Novaković, Predrag. 2015. Historija arheologije u novim zemljama Jugoistočne Evrope. Sarajevo: Univerzitet u Sarajevu.
Odeny, Beryne and Raffaella Bosurgi. 2022. „Time to end parachute science“. PLoS Medicine 19 (9): 1–3 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004099
Ognjanović, Zoran, Bojan Marinković, Marija Šegan-Radonjić i Dejan Masliković. 2019. „Cultural Heritage Digitization in Serbia: Standards, Policies, and Case Studies“. Sustainability 11, 3788. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143788
Oliveri, Vicki, Glenn Porter, Chris Davies and Pamela James. 2022. „The Juukan Gorge destruction: a case study in stakeholder-driven and shared values approach to cultural heritage protection“. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 14: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-12-2021-0208
Previtali, Mattia and Riccardo Valente. 2019. „Archaeological documentation and data sharing: Digital surveying and open data approach applied to archaeological fieldworks“. Virtual Archaeology Review 10. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2019.10377
Ribeiro, Artur. 2021. „The attitude towards science in the changing panorama of Archaeological Theory“. Trabalhos De Antropologia e Etnologia 61: 353–371.
Ribeiro, Artur and Christos Giamakis. 2023. „On Class and Elitism in Archaeology“. Open Archaeology 9 (1): 1–22 https://doi.org/10.1515/OPAR-2022-0309
Richards-Rissetto, Heather. 2022. „Technological Challenges to Practicing 3D Ethics in Archaeology“. In Digital Heritage and Archaeology in Practice: Data, Ethics, and Professionalism, edited by Ethan Watrall and Lynne Goldstein, 163–193. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2mwg3mj.13
Richardson, Lorna-Jane. 2018. „Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology“. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology 1: 64–73. https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.13
Ros, Sayumphu. 2024. „Can archaeology be a form of colonialism? Exploring the implications of the actor-network theory“. Herança 7 (2): 152–161. https://doi.org/10.52152/heranca.v7i2.993
Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.
Said, Edward. (1978) 2003. Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.
Salami, Aishat. 2024. „Artificial intelligence, digital colonialism, and the implications for Africa’s future development“. Data & Policy 6: e67-1–e67-12 https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2024.75
Schiller, Herbert I. 1976. „Communication and Cultural Domination“. International Journal of Politics 5 (4): 1–127.
Šegan-Radonjic, Marija and Milica Tapavički-Ilić. 2021. „Digitisation and Data Management of Archaeological Heritage in Serbia (1991–2020)“. Internet Archaeology 58. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.58.15
Šimunović-Bešlin, Biljana. 2023. „Digitalne tehnologije i savremena srpska istoriografija“. U Trendovi u savremenoj srpskoj istoriografiji, uredio Mile Bjelajac, 119–151. Beograd: Institut za noviju istoriju Srbije. https://doi.org/10.31212/istoriografija.2023.22.bes.119-151
Sekar, Jenith and Kuldeep Siwach. 2021. „Cyber- Colonialism: Ethical Solutions and Ethnographic Alternatives“. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts 9 (2): 2266–2280.
Stobiecka, Monika. 2020. „Archaeological Heritage in the Age of Digital Colonialism“. Archaeological Dialogues 27: 113–125. https://doi:10.1017/S1380203820000239
Tasić, Nenad i Jevremović Vitomir. 2003. „Arheopackpro! - programski sistem za unos, obradu i interpretaciju digitalne arheološke dokumentacije“. Pregled Nacionalnog centra za digitalizaciju 3: 54–58 .
Thussu, Daya Kishan. 2005. „From Macbride to Murdoch: The Marketisation of Global Communication“. Javnost - The Public 12 (3): 47–60, https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2005.11008894
Van Dinh, Tran. 1976. „Non-Alignment and Cultural Imperialism“. The Black Scholar 8 (3): 39–49. https://doi:10.1080/00064246.1976.11413873
Vujičić, Novak. 2020. „Pravne prepreke za Creative Commons licence u autorskom pravu Srbije“. U Intelektualna svojina i internet, uredio Dušan Popović, 91–121. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu. https://doi.org/10.51204/internet_dijalog_2006a
Vuković, Jasna, ur. 2022. STEM in Heritage: Procedures, Methods, and Teaching. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Vuković, Jasna. 2024. Osnove metodologije terenskih arheoloških istraživanja. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Wang, Hanbing, Junyan Du, Yue Li, Lie Zhang, and Xiang Li. 2025. „Grand Challenges in Immersive Technologies for Cultural Heritage“. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2475996
Walsham, Geoff. 2017. „ICT4D Research: Reflections on History and Future Agenda“. Information Technology for Development 23 (1): 18–41. https://doi:10.1080/02681102.2016.1246406
Wensing, Ed. 2020. „The destruction of Juukan Gorge: lessons for planners and local governments“. Australian Planner 56 (4): 241–248. https://doi:10.1080/07293682.2020.1866045
Winter, Tim. 2019. Geocultural Power: China's Quest to Revive the Silk Roads for the Twenty-First Century. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Yılmaz, Özgür. 2025. „The Origins of Digital Colonialism“. İmgelem 16: 321–344. https://doi:10.53791/imgelem.1636282
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
ERIH PLUS - European Reference Index for the Humanities
World Cat
AnthroSerbia
