WAC, ethics, enforcement, and rights

Abstract

How could we use the meeting at Stanford as an opportunity to develop a WAC general code of ethics and yet break away from proscriptive statements that tend to be hierarchical and linear, especially considering those attending the meeting did not all necessarily agree on what such a code should be trying to achieve or have any clear idea of what form/s it might take. Moreover, fundamental differences existed in our understandings of basic concepts, such as social justice and the roles of archaeology in society, which underlie any approach we might take. These tensions led to an agreement that our work should focus on developing a conceptual process, supported by documents and tools for thinking about ethics. While Sean feels this is on the right track, he raises practical concerns that WAC might need to take a more proactive stance, providing mechanisms, processes and resources for the mediation and resolution of ethical disputes that will meet the needs of disenfranchised peoples who may turn to WAC seeking redress for injustices.