The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) is a professional organisation for archaeologists working in the United Kingdom and overseas. It was founded in 1982, and at 21 July 2020 had 3,931 members overall, of whom 3,033 were accredited professionals; it also has 80 accredited organisations.CIfA members are drawn from across the archaeological community, and from around the world - in 2018 the membership included archaeologists from 40 countries.Accredited membership is by election following a satisfactory demonstration of archaeological experience and competence and an undertaking to abide by the Institute's Code of conduct. CIfA's aims are to advance the practice of archaeology and allied disciplines by promoting professional standards and ethics for conserving, managing, understanding and promoting enjoyment of the heritage.CIfA is currently based at the University of Reading..
The Dig Digital project is an Archaeological Archives Forum (AAF) initiative and represents the culmination of 10 years of research and collaboration. Managed and delivered by DigVentures, in partnership with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) and funded by Historic England, the aim of Dig Digital was to establish a methodology for digital archive compilation and its integration into archaeological working practices across the United Kingdom. This was achieved by designing a web-based resource, complete with innovative tools and guidance built around FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) principles, that is integrated within the existing regulatory framework for professional archaeological practice in the UK. The Dig Digital project provides a good example of a collaboratively designed resource that promotes sustainable practices and supports implementation in archaeological digital data management.
In a 2019 Internet Archaeology article, Elizabeth Pearson posed the question 'are we back in the Dark Ages?'. This question was made in reference to a developer-funded archaeology sector that was generating vast quantities of evidence and, particularly, in recent years, specialist environmental data, but was failing to mobilise this in a theoretical framework that generated meaningful advancement in terms of research. The introduction to the 2021 Internet Archaeology special issue on Digital Archiving in Archaeology (Richards et al. 2021) went on to address 'a digital resource that is now in jeopardy' – not only because of the risk of technical obsolescence, but also because of crucial limitations to its interoperability and discoverability. This article builds on these arguments and complements vital work underway on high-level, internationally focused data infrastructure initiatives (e.g. Wright and Richards 2018). We emphasise here the importance of parallel discussions at a community level, particularly with the people who routinely produce archaeological data, as key to enhancing data synthesis and research potential. Specifically, we report on two surveys conducted by the 'Rewilding' Later Prehistory project at Oxford Archaeology, in collaboration with Historic England and Bournemouth University, which originated in the 'Rewilding' project's concern with improving access to palaeoenvironmental data produced within Britain. Substantial amounts of zooarchaeological and archaeobotanical data remain buried in grey literature, limited-access publications and archive reports (not to mention floppy disks, CDs and microfiche), with no integrative means of searching for particular periods or categories of evidence. This lack of accessibility inhibits specialists from contextualising their findings, and was exemplified recently by the Archaeology on Furlough project tripling the known number of aurochs finds in Britain by trawling online records, journals and museum records (Wiseman 2020). The results of the surveys presented here, which targeted both environmental archaeologists specifically and the wider sector, demonstrate a significant appetite amongst archaeologists to improve data networks and for their work to contribute meaningfully to research agendas. Contextualised within a disciplinary landscape that is increasingly dynamic in its approach to tackling the openness and connectivity of 'big data', we argue that better data synthesis in environmental archaeology, and the developer-funded sector more broadly, can be more than just a mirage on the horizon, particularly once the people who produce the data are given an active voice in the matter.
