Unauthorized cultural resource alterations range from looting and grave robbing to contract violations and wildland fires. Such alterations degrade cultural resources’ spiritual, communal, ecological, economic, and scientific values. Alterations often violate communal senses of place, security, and belonging. Alterations complicate jurisdiction-specific management, which is premised on up-to-date information on resource sizes, conditions, and significance. Cultural resource damage assessment protocols based on proven forensic practices distil to eight fieldwork steps: verify the alteration, assemble the team, survey the scene, document the evidence, gather the evidence, assess the archaeological value and the cost of repair and restoration, prescribe emergency remediation, and confirm evidence documentation and custody. The eight steps give special consideration to local communities and Indigenous Territories, where unauthorized alterations are as common as they are elsewhere, whereas impacts to spiritual and cultural values are generally greater. Adapted to jurisdiction- and incident-specific circumstances, the steps will guide responses to alterations by community leaders, land managers, regulators, law enforcement agents, and archaeologists, including preparation of excellent damage assessment reports. Damage assessment practitioners and land managers should refine these practices to deter alterations, engage Tribes and other affected communities, halt postalteration degradation, ensure accountability, and enable jurisdiction-scale curation of cultural resources and their unique value constellations.

In November 1995, the Laboratory of Archaeology at the University of Georgia submitted inventories and summaries of Indigenous ancestors and funerary objects in its holdings to comply with the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). However, after this submission, the Laboratory attempts at consultation with federally recognized descendant Tribal communities who have cultural ties in the state of Georgia were not successful, and NAGPRA-related activities essentially stalled at the Laboratory. Beginning in 2019, the Laboratory's staff recognized a lack of formal NAGPRA policies or standards, which led to a complete reevaluation of the Laboratory's approach to NAGPRA. In essence, it was the Laboratory's renewed engagement with NAGPRA and descendan tribal communities that became the catalyst for change in the Laboratory's philosophy as a curation repository. This shift in thinking set the Laboratory on a path toward building a descendant community–informed institutional integrity (DCIII) level of engagement with consultation and collaborative efforts in all aspects of collections management and archaeological research. In this article, we outline steps that the Laboratory has taken toward implementing meaningful policies and practices created with descendant Tribal communities that both fulfill and extend bounds of NAGPRA compliance.

This introductory article foregrounds the articles in this special issue, “Professional–Collector Collaboration: Global Challenges and Solutions,” complementing the special issue “Professional–Collector Collaboration Moving beyond Debate to Best Practice,” also published in Advances in Archaeological Practice. The articles that we introduce here cover examples and case studies from European settings such as Norway, the Czech Republic, England, Wales, Finland, and Belgium—places that have been exploring how to respond to the challenge of working meaningfully with collectors and finders of archaeological artifacts, especially metal detectorists. These are joined by examples from Australia, Mexico, Uruguay, and even the United States, in the context of handling—at first glance—problematic collections originating from elsewhere. The articles are diverse in their settings and the challenges they describe, but they point to the need for participatory and democratic approaches to archaeological heritage and the different publics that engage with it.

Over the past 20 years, collaboration has become an essential aspect of archaeological practice in North America. In paying increased attention to the voices of descendant and local communities, archaeologists have become aware of the persistent injustices these often marginalized groups face. Building on growing calls for a responsive and engaged cultural heritage praxis, this forum article brings together a group of Native and non-Native scholars working at the nexus of history, ethnography, archaeology, and law in order to grapple with the role of archaeology in advancing social justice. Contributors to this article touch on a diverse range of critical issues facing Indigenous communities in the United States, including heritage law, decolonization, foodways, community-based participatory research, and pedagogy. Uniting these commentaries is a shared emphasis on research practices that promote Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. In drawing these case studies together, we articulate a sovereignty-based model of social justice that facilitates Indigenous control over cultural heritage in ways that address their contemporary needs and goals.

This article introduces the first of what will ultimately be two collections of case studies in archaeologist–responsible/responsive artifact collector collaboration. Focused on the United States, the articles in this issue of Advances in Archaeological Practice share the thoughts and experiences of archaeologists representing diverse employment sectors (compliance, agency, museum, and university), artifact collectors, and members of descendant communities. Research areas extend from California to Virginia and from Ohio to the Texas/Mexico border. The breadth of the writers' backgrounds and their focal regions reinforce the wide applicability of collaborative best practices. Every author explicitly treats two subjects: (1) the intersection of their work with the Society for American Archaeology's (SAA) recently published guidelines for ethical professional–collector collaboration, and (2) their own practical suggestions for establishing and nurturing those relationships. This introductory article provides an overview of each of the other contributions, notes how the contributions articulate with the SAA guidelines, and offers its own, mostly philosophical suggestions for prospective members of professional–collector collaborations.

As archaeology has evolved, partnerships between private collectors and archaeologists have ebbed and flowed. This article contributes to a growing body of work dedicated to recognizing the contributions of the collecting community, with a focus on maintaining reciprocal models for long-term collaborations. This research article argues that for these collaborative efforts to progress, archaeologists must operate through an archaeological ethnographic lens that fosters work in partnership and generative dialogues. Utilizing ethics from the Society for American Archaeology's “Statement on Responsible and Responsive Stewards of the Past” (Society for American Archaeology 2018), an undergraduate student and private collector partnered to retroactively document an artifact collection collected over 60 years in Colorado's San Luis Valley. This article is distinct, however, in that it centers the research methods, offering a pragmatic example of utilizing an archaeological ethnographic framework alongside collaborative inquiry and oral history methodologies. The partnership cultivated within the research team opened a new line of inquiry into the collector's past collaborations with professionals, revealing a variety of informative and illuminating stories. As the academic discourse widens, incorporating such stories into the canon will improve collaborations and foster networks of partners to create sustainable long-term collaborations that ultimately lead to greater understanding of and care for the material past.

The objective of this article is to share how professional archaeologists can leverage their knowledge and influence to develop collectors and amateur archaeologists into responsible and responsive stewards (RRS). This approach furthers the primary purposes of the National Historic Preservation Act as well as the ethics of the Society for American Archaeology. I share my own journey about finding artifacts in the Texas Panhandle, yearning to understand more about them, and how a poster in a gas station led me to visiting a local Stone Age Fair where I met a professional archaeologist. This archaeologist mentor was willing to answer my questions and guide me to greater understanding of archaeological ethics and practice, which prompted me to document everything I had found. In turn, I have shared my experience with many other nonprofessionals. Archaeologist mentors can have great influence if they are willing to meet collectors and amateur archaeologists on their level. Ultimately, collectors and archaeologists share a love of artifacts and a passion for the history behind them.

Overall healing, harmony, and balance within Ndee (Apache) communities can be understood through the Ndee term Gózhó—“beauty, balance, and harmony.” Beyond this Ndee cultural precept, however, how are such states of Gózhó achieved, whether in the past or today? Within archaeological research on Ndee lands, achieving healing and promoting health is crucial to overall individual and community well-being. Healing activities that contribute to overall states of Gózhó can take many forms. As Rybak and Decker-Fitts (2009:334) suggest, “Native American healing practices exemplify key cultural perspectives and influence the identity development of Native American individuals.” Such healing practices including the use of yellow cattail pollen (hádńdín; Typha spp.) for protection are based on traditions and perspectives typically outside the mainstream of Western psychological tenets, yet they can have significant impact on the sense of well-being for Ndee communities. Ndee cultural specialists with the White Mountain Apache Tribe demonstrate that such traditions and perspectives are not only necessary for continued community well-being but are powerful conduits amplifying the past as present, which contribute to the ongoing cyclical and reciprocal nature of the ways Ndee communities have related to Nígosdzán—Mother Earth—since time immemorial.

Practices of denunciation are at once ubiquitous and marginalised in literature on the Guatemalan armed conflict. Meanwhile, ordinary Guatemalans who spontaneously denounced neighbours, former friends and fellow villagers have largely escaped scrutiny in scholarly work on low-level perpetrators. Departing from untapped confidential documents in the Historical Archive of the National Police, this article provides the first archival study of denunciatory behaviour during the Guatemalan Civil War, specifically at the height of the conflict (1970–85). This contribution reveals both the strategic considerations that spurred state intelligence apparatuses to elicit civilian information as well as the broad range of personal, opportunistic and strategic motives that drove civilians to denounce. The case study questions scholarly consensus on the spontaneous and voluntary character of denunciation by arguing that besides providing novel pathways for opportunistic action, denunciations also opened up new strategies for survival in the face of a civil war that structured available choices.