Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Integrating Tribal Expertise into Processes to Identify, Evaluate, and Record Cultural Resources 6 3.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND LITERATURE REVIEW Judging from existing literature and studies, the state of current practice in the use of tribal expertise and perspectives in heritage resource management and within the context of the Section 106 process is somewhat limited. There is, however, burgeoning literature demonstrating keen interest in involving descendant communities in meaningful ways to inform research questions and problem statements, the research process, analysis, and interpretation. The literature illustrates the positive outcomes and deeper understanding that come from collaboration. It provides a context for developing more engaged archaeology that is relevant for more engaged cultural resource management. The project team examined relevant tribal engagement projects and programs implemented by non- transportation agencies and in academe both in the United States and in other nations with descendant communities. The bibliography lists literature and documents relevant to building context and perspective on the use of tribal expertise within heritage resource management and the Section 106 process. Augmenting the work of NCHRP Task 114 is the March 2019 release of the Government Accountability Office Tribal Consultation: Additional Federal Actions Needed for Infrastructure Projects, 2 which provides the findings of their multiple-year review of agenciesâ consulting processes for infrastructure projects. Respondents included 57 tribes and 21 federal agencies, and the report includes comments from 100 tribes received in 2016. The tribes and the agencies provided observations on those factors that hindered effective consultation. From the tribal perspective, the key issues are the following. ⢠Late initiation of the consultation process. ⢠Failure to consider adequately tribal input in decision-making. ⢠Lack of respect for tribal sovereignty or the government-to-government consultative relationship. From the agency perspective, the key issues focus on the following. ⢠Difficulty maintaining correct contact information for tribes. ⢠Lack of resources to support needed consultative efforts. ⢠Challenges in consultation when multiple agencies are involved. Although many of the agencies and tribal participants in the GAO study have made individual efforts to address the issues identified above, the particularistic approach to tackling such problems does not provide consistency in the consultative process, nor does it facilitate collaborative efforts by multiple agencies. The GAO report offers general recommendations for all agencies to improve consultation, including the establishment of a centralized information system and a policy review by all agencies on feedback to tribes regarding agency consideration of tribal input in project-level decision-making. It is that latter recommendation that was identified specifically for the FHWAâs consideration. The project team reviewed other available reports, articles, and literature with contextual value to those interested in integrating tribal expertise into heritage resource management and the Section 106 process. This reportâs bibliography, although by no means complete, informed the project team as they sought to evaluate the findings of this study. What is clear from a review of the material is the need for increased and ongoing collaboration through all phases of a project. Such collaboration leads to positive outcomes, including better relationships through greater understanding of approaches, perspectives, and concerns.
