AADMI Grant Proposal to the Mellon Foundation

Initiative on Publishing in the Archaeology of the Americas Scholarly Monograph Initiative

A Collaborative Planning Proposal for Multi-Delivery Format Publications Submitted to the Mellon Foundation February 2, 2009

Applicants

Darrin Pratt, Director, University Press of Colorado
Charles Backus, Director, Texas A&M University Press
Kathryn Conrad, Interim Director, University of Arizona Press
Daniel J. J. Ross, Director, University of Alabama Press
Meredith Morris-Babb, Director, University Press of Florida
Glenda Cotter, Interim Director, University of Utah Press

Executive Summary

The archaeology of the Americas-including the interrelated subfields of bioarchaeology and physical anthropology, specifically as they relate to studying the peopling of the Americas-is a field of scholarship that presents special publishing challenges to university presses. This discipline has been underserved in terms of both the types of work accepted for publication and the adequacy of supporting materials undergirding the scholarly arguments advanced in those which are published. The collaborative effort envisioned in this proposal would encourage the participating presses to publish more comprehensive works in the archaeology of the Americas, to publish them more fully supported by complete data sets and innovative electronic demonstrations, and to publish them in ways that facilitate their dissemination to the largest possible audience. The presses listed below are particularly interested in developing a recognized digital platform for metadata and e-collaboration and in creating prototypes that will allow the development, testing, and evaluation of mixed-media publishing for the target field. Junior scholars will especially benefit, because we will target first books from junior faculty to serve as prototypes.

The six university presses that have joined in this proposal are established in this academic subfield and are experienced in working with the relevant individual scholars and scholarly associations. These presses are, in alphabetical order, the University of Alabama Press (UALP), the University of Arizona Press (UAZP), the University Press of Colorado (UPC), the University Press of Florida (UPF), Texas A&M University Press (TAMUP), and the University of Utah Press (UUP).

The purpose of this initiative is to publish a new generation of monographs enhanced by robust electronic apparatus. In this, we concur with the Ithaka Group in its call for "multimedia and multi-delivery format" publications. We need new models for combining a variety of media to maximum advantage, new business plans for producing revenue streams for developing these multimedia publications, and new methods of collaboration to improve learning curves and reduce costs (especially to smaller publishers).

In archaeology, which utilizes large databases and increasingly relies on virtual experiments and demonstrations, publishers have had to turn down many exciting manuscripts or severely reshape them into more limited presentations because of the sheer scope of the descriptive evidence and vast illustrative content available for inclusion. An author trying to support an argument but unable to include all of the requisite data may find the work unpublished, or published in such truncated form that the full import is lost.

We seek to establish a shared platform for these robust, digital monographs, a platform that will include not only the complete monograph text but also fuller access to underlying data than is available in the corresponding print editions. In developing this digital platform, our group envisions (1) creating a host for incorporating the additional electronic components that enhance our print publications; (2) generating models of both display and access to these components- through development of a prototype that is suggestive rather than prescriptive-that facilitate the incorporation and interpretation of fuller data sets by both the author and other scholars; and (3) exploring models for sustainability beyond any implementation grant period funded by Mellon.

We still will produce peer-reviewed monographs, but the data and illustrations included will no longer be limited by the financial or technological considerations of a print book. The monographs-enhanced by large data sets, color illustrations, three-dimensional images, video components, and, perhaps, interactive components such as reader commenting-will present the synthesis derived from those data. Additionally, we envision that this multi-media platform will take advantage of the electronic interface to not only present more underlying data, but to provide access in new and more interactive ways than the more static mode of print allows, including the possibility of live updating on the part of the author. The cyber components of this initiative will also allow other scholars to use the data not only to evaluate and comment on the arguments presented in the monograph, but also to expand and advance development in the field by conducting their own research and analysis using more complete data sets.

With financial support from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, over the next year we intend to have extensive conversations within our group of presses as well as with: archaeologists working in the Americas; relevant archaeological organizations; existing digital repositories with whom we might partner; individuals and organizations sponsoring related digital archaeology projects; hosts of existing platforms that might be adapted for our project; program officers at the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation; recipients of other related collaborative Mellon grants.

The purpose of these extensive conversations is to develop a platform concept that is best suited to the end-user (the archaeologist) and sustainable for the producer (the publisher). As we delineate and refine our concept during this planning phase, our participating group of presses will produce a detailed implementation plan and budget.

Reasons for This Initiative

Identifying an underserved field

As is the case with monographs in other specialized fields in the humanities, sales of hardcover monographs in the archaeology of the Americas are often 500 copies or less. Presses can afford to publish only a limited number of such projects and may have to reject a worthy project on cost considerations alone. In order to make margin and recover costs with such low sales figures for those they do accept, presses enforce strict length and image limitations to constrain production expenses. As a consequence, books published in this area are underserved in qualitative terms, in that crucial data and supporting displays are often eliminated for reasons of cost and available technology. Each of the presses in this group reports evidence that the monographs they do publish do not feature extensive data sets requiring full reporting or expensive supporting art, let alone innovative technologies. Thus the kinds of works sought for this initiative are less represented, despite their enormous potential benefit to the field. In the Journal of Scholarly Publishing ("Electronic Publishing in Archaeology") Jingfeng Xia writes, "What archaeological researchers need are efficient communication platforms that can provide prompt and complete access to excavation materials as well as research results. Electronic publishing is one of the solutions" (Xia 2006: 273).

Publishers routinely work with authors to hone their works to include what, from the archaeologist's point of view, is only the bare minimum of supporting material. Archaeology, like art history, is underserved in a qualitative fashion if print monographs must be published without all the supporting imagery or data required. The book may be published, but it will not be fully contextualized because of the missing information, data, and images. Thus many archaeologists have turned to supplementary CDs and to personal Web sites as a place to post important data to provide that missing context. Although these supplements are solid additions to the monographs, they are scattered in a variety of forms and locations, making it difficult for scholars to examine fully and utilize these data for advancement of the field.

Despite the potential offered by digital solutions to the problem of archaeological communication, Xia notes that "the digital dissemination of research results is relatively scarce" and that "most efforts have been made to work on preserving and sharing archaeological data" (Xia 2006: 270). Our initiative seeks to address this gap and provide a model for the digital presentation of research results-packaged with the underlying data in new and exciting ways made possible by electronic dissemination-at the monograph level.

Archaeology and anthropology are, relatively speaking, more journal-driven fields than some other areas of the humanities. However, the fuller presentation and interpretation of larger bodies of evidence are precisely where book-length monographs have the most to offer. Journal articles, even in electronic journals, cannot be considered substitutes for the enhanced monographic publications we intend to explore through this collaborative project.

Special risk to junior scholars

Because of the higher costs of publishing monographs in this field, especially those which incorporate digital components, presses tend to be particularly attentive to the "track records" and reputations of authors. Junior scholars, who may be particularly proficient in technological advances like virtual modeling, are thus more likely to be bypassed when the expenses of the project are high. This initiative will seek to address their vulnerability by selecting projects by junior faculty for our prototypes (to be used to develop specific technologies and publishing strategies).

Contribution to the humanities and humanistic understanding

Under the rubric of the archaeology of the Americas, there are numerous different "archaeologies" covered. Publications from our group of presses address not only inquiries into prehistoric antiquity (Aztec, Maya, Ancestral Puebloan, the Mound Builders), but also historical archaeology (nautical archaeology, the archaeology of the colonial and frontier periods throughout the Americas). In addition, as noted above on page three, we include under this umbrella bioarchaeology and physical anthropology, particularly as they relate to the early prehistory and peopling of the New World.

On the surface, of course, archaeological inquiry is conducted in a scientific fashion. Whereas historians, for example, spend much of their time at libraries and historical societies examining collections of historic documents, archaeologists and physical anthropologists spend their time in the field and in the lab. Archaeologists employ sophisticated technology such as GIS and satellite imagery to locate and map new sites, and some are now supplanting radiocarbon dating with new methods such as INAA (Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis) to date archaeological artifacts and remains.

Nevertheless, this ostensibly scientific behavior on the part of archaeologists is all in the service of answering basic humanistic questions. Who were the ancient Americans, the ancestors of modern day Maya, Nahua, modern Pueblo peoples, and the Inuit? How did they live? What did they believe about their place in the universe? Who were their deities and what sort of afterlife did they anticipate? How were their societies structured and organized? How and why did they war with each other? Recently, increasing attention has even been paid to the lives of ordinary citizens of complex societies, not just the rulers and elites who left behind monuments in their own honor. To answer many of these questions, archaeologists combine their scientific techniques with the insights of linguistics, epigraphy, and even art history to gain a fuller understanding of these past cultures. Moreover, some of the answers may be relevant to the current course of human societies, as popularized by Jared Diamond in his book Collapse. Significantly, one of Diamond's case-studies in this work is the fall of the ancient Maya from 800-900 A.D., although the cause of this precipitous Maya "collapse" is still being debated by archaeologists.

Bioarchaeology and physical anthropology have long sought an answer to one of the most vexing questions of all: who were the first Americans? Although there is mounting evidence for pre- Clovis occupation (more than 13,000 years ago), the Clovis versus pre-Clovis debate is far from settled. Did the ancestors of the indigenous peoples of the New World arrive in North America via a land and ice bridge over the Bering Straits? Or did they arrive by sea in South America nearly 30,000 years ago (as some archaeologists claim) from somewhere across the Pacific? Jumping forward in time, historic archaeologists supplement the documentary work done by historians, adding data drawn from the archaeological record to support or contradict long-held beliefs about historic figures. For example, recent work done in Virginia at what is believed to be the site of Pocahontas's village near the settlement of Jamestown may have much to add to the historic record, once the excavations are complete.

By making available the larger underlying datasets that often undergird monographs in archaeology without appearing in print, our collaborative project will facilitate both a greater and faster exchange of ideas between archaeologists. This will allow them to develop and disseminate more nuanced and informed answers to many of the questions above, as well as to test and flesh out the conclusions of their peers. What's more, in some regions such as Mexico and Central America, access to these larger datasets may very well provide the base for the archaeology of the future, as archaeologists find it increasingly difficult to get the necessary permits to excavate newly located and well-known sites. Within that context, existing data and the arguments it supports become the basis for developing new knowledge. Web-based platforms also facilitate the manipulation of data to explore certain questions of great interest to the humanities. For example, facial reconstruction of remains can allow actual physical characteristics to be compared with artistic renderings that have been preserved, allowing understanding of a culture's aesthetics. Three-dimensional reconstructions of partial remains can allow visual exploration of a range of issues not possible in any other way.

Nature of the Collaboration

The six presses listed on this application propose to (1) create a digital platform to host the electronic components of projects from the participating presses on a single, searchable Web site; (2) develop prototype print projects with appropriate "cyber companions," evaluating the electronic components' contribution to the monograph's use and sales; and (3) share the technological expertise acquired among participating presses.

Digital platform

The participating presses have neither the staff nor the financial resources to hire special consultants and Web developers or to develop the prototype e-monographs or digital platforms that would serve this need. Nor would the publication rates of any one of the participating presses garner the visibility of a combined effort. By working together, the collaborating presses can make the project far more visible. Moreover, our combined presence will facilitate developing e-relations with the digital archives of relevant scholarly societies, such as the Mellon-supported ArchaeoInformatics project, and archaeological sites, such as the Chaco Digital Initiative. The presses have initiated discussion with the members of the ArchaeoInformatics project. Keith Kintigh and John Howard at Arizona State University have asked if our presses would be interested in working with them to create prototypes for including different kinds of data under our initiative. Several possible platform hosts have been identified, including the Archaeology Center at the University of West Florida, the University of Utah libraries, and the Texas Digital Library. Factors to be considered in selecting the host include (1) expertise in handling archaeological data; (2) stability of the host organization; and (3) capacity of the site's computers and project managers.

Prototype development and testing

A number of diverse digital initiatives have already been developed and tested for the dissemination of archaeological research via the Web. These include "databases, CAD models, geographic information systems (GIS) data sets, and images" (Xia 2006: 275). Much remains to be done, however, in meshing these efforts with academe's needs for routine evaluation of the quality of work (formal peer review), more extensive synthesis and meta-analysis of data, and the technological education of readers.

Examples of uses of digital components to publications that have been offered include: three- dimensional models of humans showing identifying markers to trace genetic groups; innovative, virtual reconstruction of artifacts to determine their function and characteristics; and noninvasive CAT scans of human remains to replace skeletal analysis, which is a more acceptable method of analysis under NAGPRA (the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act). To be more precise, we might expect to see raw and analyzed data on the following topics:

hydrological and geological data of the sites studied;
landscape data (e.g., settlement pattern and demographic distribution maps, satellite images showing changes in the landscape over time);
architectural features;
ceramic data (e.g., production technology, distribution, assemblages, chemical analyses, community exchange patterns);
stratigraphy descriptions;
faunal and floral remains data;
tool production and use data;
epigraphic data;
site maps;
artifact photos;
osteological data from burials (e.g., dental, histological, and taphonomic data); and
chemical analyses (e.g., strontium isotope ratios) of prehistoric bone and dental enamel compared with the place of burial to trace human mobility throughout the Americas. Intersection of Print and Electronic Publishing

One important aspect of our proposed collaborative project is that, at least initially, our group will be working at the intersection of print and electronic publishing, exploring the possibilities-and pitfalls-of expanded electronic editions of the standard print monograph. Our presses fully intend to continue publishing print monographs in the archaeology and bioarchaeology of the Americas. At the same time, with Mellon's assistance, we want to develop electronic alternatives for scholarly communication at the monograph level that offer enhanced capabilities and possibilities for improving communication and research among scholars. At some point such digital monographs could fully replace print monographs, but none of us see that as a goal of this project (or even a realistic interpretation of the speed at which academic readership is moving to digital alternatives).

Benefits of Collaborative Undertaking

There are a number of key benefits to our collaborative effort, and they will be outlined in detail below. Beyond the economies of scale that will allow several small- to medium-sized university presses to take risks experimenting with new technologies, this project has potential to make an impact on the field of the archaeology of the Americas.

Participating presses bring a wide range of experience in this field

Each of the presses involved has an established list or lists in these fields, and this collaborative project is designed to help each press further develop, strengthen, and solidify those lists through experiments in digital enhancement and dissemination. The focus statements for each of the participating presses follow.

The University of Alabama Press (UALP) has been publishing in the archaeology and anthropology of the Americas since 1975. Currently, Alabama has 189 volumes in print in this area, 4 with CDs, with another 19 due by summer 2009 (4 of which will also have CDs). Adding 18 to 20 new publications to the list each year, the press has particular strengths in Southeastern and Caribbean archaeology. Alabama frequently participates in cooperative exhibits, especially with the University Press of Florida, and is always willing to display books for other presses at meetings.
The University of Arizona Press (UAZP), founded by professors in the Department of Anthropology, has a nearly fifty-year history of publishing monographs on archaeology, many of which have become classics in the field of Southwestern archaeology. Arizona's archaeological monographs have focused on research in the southwestern United States, northern Mexico, Mesoamerica, the Amazon basin, and Peru. Most recently they have addressed indigenous archaeology, ethnoarchaeology, bioarchaeology, issues of violence and warfare, anthropogenic environmental change, cultural landscape studies, archaeology of colonialism, and historical archaeology. Arizona also manages a number of series focusing on the Americas: Archaeology of Colonialism in Native North America, which specifically emphasizes under-published or marginalized regions such as Alaska, the Canadian Arctic, and the Subarctic; Amerind Studies in Archaeology, which emanate from advanced seminars on the Americas by established and new scholars; and Native Peoples of the Americas, which presents original research about the many previously ignored or under-studied culture areas that span the New World. Arizona published twelve archaeological titles in 2007 and will publish nine in 2008. Arizona has collaborative publishing agreements with the Department of Anthropology at the University of Arizona and the Amerind Foundation.
The University Press of Colorado (UPC) publishes in the archaeology of the Americas broadly but with a distinct focus on the cultures of Mesoamerica. UPC has a distinguished series within this area of study, the Mesoamerican Worlds Series: From the Olmecs to the Danzantes (MWS), edited by Davíd Carrasco (Harvard University) and Eduardo Matos Moctezuma (Museo del Templo Mayor, Mexico City). UPC has been publishing Mesoamerican archaeology for eighteen years, beginning with the 1990 release of Mesoamerica's Ancient Cities, and currently has twenty-four titles in print in the MWS, as well as nineteen others outside the series proper. UPC released six new titles in the archaeology of the Americas in 2008, and plans to release seven in 2009.
The University Press of Florida (UPF) publishes a broad range of archaeology of the Americas materials that specifically focus on works of North American, Caribbean, Mesoamerican, Andean, maritime, historical, and forensic archaeology, along with projects in bioarchaeology and physical anthropology. UPF releases approximately twenty books each year and actively supports nine publications series in these disciplines. UPF's collaborative publishing agreements in these areas include formal relationships with the Society for Historical Archaeology, the Florida Museum of Natural History, and the Antiquities, Monuments and Museums Corporation of the Bahamas.
Texas A&M University Press (TAMUP) has published books in physical anthropology, Southwestern archaeology, and the peopling of the Americas for more than a decade. The physical anthropology list includes specific sites, guides to fieldwork related to archaeology, and methodological works. Although many of the distinguished nautical archaeology titles published by TAMUP fall outside the geographic focus of this cooperative arrangement, the technologies being developed in that series will also be made available for the benefit of the participating presses. The press has a series agreement with the Center for the Study of the First Americans, which forms the core of this focus in TAMUP's list of human evolution and the early prehistory of the Americas.
The University of Utah Press (UUP) has been publishing in the fields of anthropology and archaeology for nearly six decades. Since 1950, UUP has produced 125 volumes of Anthropological Papers, a medium for illuminating research in anthropology and allied sciences bearing upon the peoples and cultures of the American West. Since 1999, UUP has produced twenty volumes in its Foundations of Archaeological Inquiry series, which provides readers with innovative discussions of archaeological theory and the methods used to reconstruct the world's past. UUP has also published numerous monographs, site reports, and edited volumes regarding specialized subjects in the anthropology, archaeology, and ethnohistory of the American Southwest, Mexico, and Central and South America. UUP is now embarking on a new initiative to acquire monographs that focus on the peoples and ethnography of the Great Basin and the American Southwest. Participating presses better serve their audiences

By working in a collaborative fashion, our group intends to go beyond current e-book models and offer something that archaeologists really need-synthesis of information presented together with far more robust data sets that support that synthesis. To date, most e-book products have been simple HTML or PDF files that are exact replications of the print books. As Hilary Ballon writes in the Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (JSAH) on the electronic issues of JSAH available on JSTOR, "the online format replicates the printed page, as if the computer were a paperless photocopy machine" (JSAH 67(4), December 2008:481). In some cases they are actually lesser versions: third-party illustrations often have to be stripped from the electronic versions, because the books were released before publishers routinely made e-book publication rights a permission standard. Thus, the main value of e-books currently is in the limited way that they are searchable and can be accessed online.

As noted above, there is a need within archaeology for published works to offer a more thorough presentation of data along with the scholarly arguments and research results drawn from that data. We hope to fulfill this need by offering more than just PDF replications of print works. Rather, we hope to deliver a complex package of text and data that will be of greater utility than current stand-alone print monographs, to, as Ballon writes, "reinvent the online edition to optimize electronic resources" (2008:481) This reinvention will not just include a more thorough presentation of data, but it will also take into consideration new forms of presentation made possible by the multi-media format of online presentation.

For example, the Mellon-funded electronic edition of JSAH has not just included more illustrations and other types of media such as film clips than print allows: the JSAH prototype actually allows a means of access making use of distinct text and illustration panels that takes advantage of online, electronic display. We envision making use of a similar display strategy, but taking it even one step further and having links to databases outside of the monograph itself. Thus, whereas the JSAH online version is still a self-contained entity (albeit enhanced when compared to the print edition), we envision a monograph that is not static or self-contained, and that would allow access to external databases that could be continually updated. This conception of a more dynamic and "open" monograph raises other sets of questions that will need to be addressed by our group during the planning period, such as the possibility that authors will want to update the arguments presented more often (i.e. more frequent versions or editions) to reflect the most current data.

Given the significant differences between a standard print monograph and the possibilities opened up by a robust electronic version, our project will make an impact on the field of archaeological publication, and, as the most recent report from the Ithaka Group ("Sustainability and Revenue Models for Online Academic Resources") maintains, "impact is the key factor in the potential for achieving long-term sustainability" (Guthrie et al. 2008: 5). Participating presses obtain more capacity at lower risk.

Currently, the six presses involved in this grant are each undertaking a variety of electronic projects on their own. Given our already scant resources, little experimentation has been done, and none of us has been able to explore a systematic approach to delivering content electronically. Where our participating presses have taken something akin to a consistent approach to e-books is through third-party vendors such as netLibrary, Ebrary, Questia, MyiLibrary, Publishers Row, and Google Books, offering, as noted above, straightforward duplicates of print books in electronic format. Participating presses' attempts to create electronic publications that actually have added value and/or content not available in the print editions have been done on a project-by-project basis (often vis-à-vis a CD or DVD packaged with a print book) that is not easily transferrable.

For example, the University Press of Colorado designed a searchable version of the reference work The Carnegie Maya: The Carnegie Institution of Washington Maya Research Program, 1913-1957 compiled by John Weeks and Jane Hill (2006) that allowed users to search by a variety of parameters specific to this work. The most unique feature was that the search results were delivered in the form of a recombined PDF containing only the material relevant to those search terms, so library users could print, for example, the 30 pages relevant to their research without the need to purchase, check out, or print all 824 pages. This product was delivered as an executable program on a CD-ROM that was packaged in the back of the book and also sold separately at a slightly discounted price. Although this book and electronic product have been successful from UPC's point of view, the programming was designed so specifically for this work-particularly the underlying search structure that allows for the recombined PDF-that it cannot be easily used as a template for electronic versions of other new book projects.

Another example is a book forthcoming (2008) from the University of Arizona Press, Chaco and After in the Northern San Juan: Excavations at the Great Bluff Great House by Catherine Cameron. This book will include a CD-ROM with eight additional appendices of comprehensive data sets (e.g., architectural, ceramic, tree ring data) that round out the more synthetic summaries and analysis in the print text. Many resources and much time on the author's and the press's parts have been put into creating this companion. A digital repository would have been an ideal setup for this data.

A project published by the University of Alabama presents another example. Remote Sensing in Archaeology, edited by Jay Johnson (2006), explains the practical manner in which NASA- developed satellite imagery is being used in noninvasive site location. This book currently includes a CD with examples of soil types, locations, and so forth, in which the sensing techniques work or fail to work. These techniques are invaluable in site location, saving time, money, and environmental damage in testing for sites where they do not exist. There was no way to describe in the text the detailed environmental requirements for success. The techniques are being updated almost daily, so small quantities of the book must frequently be reprinted with updated CD enclosures. A Web-based site, however, would be the most efficient and effective way of presenting the current state of the art. In addition to this archaeology monograph, UALP is partnering with historians and allied researches to create a Civil War database, and UALP's role in this process will be to build and serve the database.

Digitally enhanced publications by Texas A&M Press outside the field of Archaeology of the Americas suggest some ways in which participating presses' larger experiences may be used to enhance this initiative. TAMUP has already published a teaching DVD in veterinary medicine (small animal neurology), for example, and is about to release another CD on radiographic canine anatomy, and thus has dealt with a number of software issues that could prove relevant. TAMUP is currently working with an author on an interactive DVD featuring three-dimensional modeling of a ship that will appear as a supplement to a forthcoming nautical archaeology monograph. TAMUP is also collaborating with the Texas Digital Library to begin releasing full- text, Open Access digital editions of parts of its backlist, beginning with the thirteen volumes published to date in the Fay Series in Analytical Psychology, to be followed by twenty or more of the published titles in its Rachal Foundation Nautical Archaeology Series.

By collaborating, sharing information (perhaps with the help of a Wiki), and sharing a common mission and operational plan, our participating presses can build the capacity to experiment with an electronic platform that is both robust and transferrable across an entire spectrum of projects. Because we plan to work together as a collective, this platform has greater potential to create new standards and publishing models that are not only shared by our group but can also be shared with and employed by other scholarly presses with active lists in the archaeology of the Americas. Because this is a joint venture, the risk of experimentation to any individual press is much lower, which should encourage our collective to experiment and think outside the proverbial box.

Participating presses establish a prototype

The most important benefit to both archaeologists and to the goals of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation is that by collaborating on the creation of a viable platform for digital monographs, our chances of creating something that will spread beyond an individual project or a particular press are greatly improved. We intend, in short, to develop a specific and sustainable publishing model for monographs with e-components that we hope will spread to other academic publishers working in these and related fields.

Along the way, we also hope that we might, as an epiphenomenon of our work together, create models of collaborative work among university presses of different sizes and operating structures. There also appears to be great potential to spread that collaboration beyond the participating presses to a variety of scholarly societies and other related institutions, such as the University of West Florida's Archaeology Center, the Mellon-supported ArchaeoInformatics project, the Chaco Digital Initiative, the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, the Center for the Study of the First Americans, the Institute of Nautical Archaeology, and others.

A tangible goal of the planning year is to develop a basic prototype for an enhanced digital monograph in archaeology. This prototype will not be a fully fleshed out digital monograph ready for publication, but it should provide the basic structure for the creation of such a work. Using our combined experience and backlist of existing print monographs-and drawing upon the conversations we intend to have with archaeologists, data aggregators, digital repositories, and platform hosts during the course of the planning year-we will develop a prototype or model that will give concrete shape to our vision and allow us to begin securing the necessary partnerships to move the project forward.

As noted earlier, we do not envision that this prototype will be prescriptive, but rather suggestive of the possibilities engendered by our shared digital platform. In the case of the JSAH electronic journal project, for example, the Society of Architectural Historians has the distinct advantage of a product that has a relatively set form and regular structure. Although the digital version manipulates that structure in interesting ways, the JSAH is a very well-defined and consistent publication that is managed by one particular organization. In the case of our collaboration, we have six different presses with somewhat different editorial policies, production and design strategies, and audiences (as many as there are types of archaeology under the umbrella of this project), not to mention institutional and fiscal structures. What's more, the nature of each monograph will differ, and each individual project may potentially push the boundaries of the prototype. The very complexity of our collaboration, therefore, ultimately dictates a prototype that is adaptable in nature and can be manipulated to fit the circumstances as long as the underlying platform is sound.

In addition to establishing a basic prototype for digital archaeology publications (fuller design of test projects would be left to the early stages of the implementation phase), participating presses, with the help of a business planning consultant, will be researching and collaborating on the development of sustainable options for the delivery of this content. These options include the sale of projects for download (a one-time payment model most similar to selling a print book), micro-transactions (one-time payment for a section, chapter, or data set from a digital book), subscription to an aggregate database of projects from one or multiple presses, or pay-per-use alternatives. Although selling subscriptions to an aggregate database likely has the greatest potential to successfully market our prototypes to end users, developing a revenue-sharing strategy that is viable for all collaborating presses will be an interesting, and productive, challenge.

Finally, based on parameters established for the prototype, the participating presses will generate measures for evaluating the success of the project.

Participating presses offer higher profile and increased marketing opportunities

One of the advantages of this proposed collaboration is that all six presses have existing mechanisms in place for marketing these specific lists. Because our editorial collaboration revolves around developing new methods of delivering content to the end user and not developing entirely new areas of publication, each press could use existing marketing strategies to promote these new products. The collaboration, however, will also permit the development of a Web site associated with the platform and linked to the presses' own Web pages. This Web site will promote the initiative and the individual books developed under it. The project manager will interact with the marketing teams of the presses to coordinate marketing efforts.

The presses will also use joint announcements in appropriate scholarly journals, at conferences (individual presses can represent the consortium at smaller and regional meetings the others do not attend), and through Web 2.0 communication channels to alert scholars that there are publishers who are receptive to hybrid projects of this nature. With all participating presses identified, authors will be able to select the house or houses where the focus most closely fits the project. The overall effect will be to stimulate such projects.

The proposed budget includes funds to advertise the collaboration, as well as the establishment and maintenance of the Web site directing readers to projects from all participating presses.

Planning Goals

As outlined above, there is clearly a need in the field of archaeology for this initiative. Moreover, we believe that our group of presses is uniquely positioned within the field to collaborate creatively on a platform for delivering these robust digital monographs. At the same time, as a group we need to clarify and refine our concept through discussions with each other as well as relevant non-publishing partners in order to develop a workable and sustainable implementation plan. There are a number of questions that we need to address during the course of our planning period. They include:

What common parameters shared by our group would define the underlying data sets to be published and hosted electronically?
Although electronic dissemination should allow for the presentation of larger data sets, we recognize that there are technological and cost limits to what we propose. Would there, consequently, be size limits (expressed in terms of memory usage) to an individual monograph's data set? If so, how do we go about determining and setting those limits?
Would there be a limit to the number of illustrations we could publish electronically?
Would there be a limit to the additional types of datasets that could be published electronically? Can we feasibly include databases, illustrations, three-dimensional visualizations, video files, GIS data, and more (see page 7 above)? Would preference be given to less memory-intensive forms of data?
What would the respective roles of the author and publisher be with regard to the arrangement of data and other electronic components? Obviously we do not want the arguments in the monograph to suffer as a result of the author's spending too much time arranging the details of publication, nor do we want authors to simply dump enormous quantities of data on press staff or project personnel with the expectation that they will just sort it all out.
Would we need to develop additional criteria that would be used to select projects for publication that have data sets most useful for other scholars? Or are there enough projects in our current pipelines that fit the bill that have stripped out data based on traditional publication assumptions?
How will the inclusion of underlying datasets not typically present in print monographs affect or adjust the expectations of peer review?
Will there be any attempt to standardize formats of datasets or other digital projects (e.g. modeling, illustrations) for ease of cross-project analysis and comparison?
Will there be any attempt to create or allow interactivity of datasets and analyses?
What are the proprietary and copyright implications of access?
Would the authors retain proprietary control over the data on which their monographs are based and, if so, for how long? Alternatively, if we partner successfully with an organization such as Archaeoinformatics, will the data be publicly available prior to its inclusion as part of the monograph publication?
If we offer live access to underlying datasets vis-à-vis outside databases, what will the consequences be for the monograph itself? Will this create the need for more editions and updates, as the datasets change and build and the authors feel compelled to update their arguments? Will the monograph be less an argument made at a fixed point in time or an author's career and more a scholarly process over time? How will we "benchmark" the text and supporting elements to provide a reference point for further arguments and data and to tie together argument and evidence in a non-transitory way?
Unlike some other areas of the humanities, edited volumes in archaeology are received in much the same fashion as single-authored volumes. In fact, publication in this field relies heavily on edited volumes, possibly a reflection of the collaborative nature of most excavations as well as the specialization of the research. A chapter in an edited volume (or serving as an editor of a multi-authored monograph) often counts toward tenure and promotion in this field, and is thus more important in the professional careers of junior scholars than in other areas of the humanities. As a consequence, edited volumes have a weight in archaeology that they may not in other humanities fields. Should we be open, therefore, to multi-author as well as single-author volumes in the prototype phase as well as in the implementation phase? Although priority would still be for single-author monographs, might we not miss out on many very worthy, data-rich test projects by excluding multi-author works?
Will an existing software platform and interface be used, or will an entirely new platform need to be purchased or developed?
If an existing platform and interface are used, how and by whom will they be selected?
How will our group account for and allocate the costs of maintaining the data and the data repository?
Beyond the initial planning stage, what will be the staffing needs of the Archaeology of the Americas initiative?
Beyond the initial planning stage, what will be the ongoing requirements of developing or enhancing the infrastructure for delivering content online?
Both during the planning phase and afterwards, how will we apportion projects among participating presses? How will we determine which projects fit the project parameters and the priority order for implementing them? Planning Year Steps

One of the first things we will need to establish, as a group, is a full strategic plan for the project. Because we are working with a large group of presses with somewhat diverse organizational structures, different subcategories of archaeology of the Americas publications, and varying experience with digital projects of this nature, our group believes that it will be necessary to hire a full-time project manager to develop a strategic plan and manage the collaborative process with the presses. This project manager will be a shared position working on behalf of our group of presses, although for practical purposes the project manager will likely work under the auspices of the University Press of Colorado. There is space available in UPC's Boulder office building, and the project manager's salary and expenses would flow through UPC's accounting process.

This is a particularly important first step because we fully intend for this project to be sustainable beyond the grant period funded by Mellon. As the latest Ithaka report contends, "new initiatives aiming for sustainability require fully dedicated, fully invested, and intensely focused leadership" (Guthrie et al. 2008: 7). Guthrie and his colleagues make this case from the perspective of start-up online resources developed within the university. These projects are typically run by principal investigators who are faculty and therefore can devote only a fraction of their time to these entrepreneurial enterprises. This description also applies to our group of presses, whose staff members are already charged with disseminating scholarship in traditional forms and usually in a number of different fields. By creating an independent project manager position, we are vastly increasing our odds of creating a sustainable enterprise within the relatively short time frame of the grant.

To help us coordinate our efforts from the outset (including the hiring of a project manager), focus our thinking about the role of digital support for print publishing, and ensure a common vocabulary for the project, two face-to-face meetings are proposed. As a preliminary opportunity to coordinate our plans and expectations, we propose a pre-conference meeting of our group at the Society for American Archaeology annual conference in Atlanta to be held April 22-26, 2009. This is a perfect opportunity to meet, because many of our group's press representatives will already be attending this conference, so the additional cost to have a pre-conference meeting will be limited to hotel rooms, a conference room, meals, and the cost of plane tickets for those press representatives who would not normally attend the meeting.

Our second meeting would be a pre-conference meeting at the American Anthropological Association to be held in Philadelphia on December 2-6, 2009. This meeting is just over seven months after our first face-to-face meeting, and it provides a perfect opportunity to meet and discuss our progress to date (and to check in with many of our relevant constituents at the ensuing conference). We can also begin to clarify issues that still need to be addressed as we move toward a final report and implementation plan for the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

In addition to hiring the project manager and having our two face-to-face meetings as a group, additional components of the planning phase would include the following:

Establish the organizational structure of our collaborative consortium, based on discussions at the SAA and AAA as well as bi-weekly or monthly conference calls during the course of the year as needed.
Consult with archaeologists around the country, gathering feedback on our proposed digital monograph concept and, where appropriate, solicit projects of sufficient complexity to serve as test cases. These consultations would be both in person (at conferences, on campus at group member institutions) and also via teleconferencing and e-mail exchange.
Consult with relevant administrators at archaeological organizations such as the Society for American Archaeology and their Council of Affiliated Societies, the Society for Historical Archaeology, and others, soliciting feedback on our proposed digital monograph concept.
Consult-and possibily engage in an RFP process-with possible host repositories to determine both the viability of elements of our concept and to explore partnerships. These repositories include but are not limited to The Archaeology Institute at the University of West Florida, the Texas Digital Library, the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries, the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah, Bibliovault at the Chicago Distribution Center, and other individual institutional repositories affiliated with members of our group.
Consult with and explore partnerships with archaeological data aggregators such as ArchaeoInformatics (Keith Kintigh and John Howard at Arizona State University) and the Chaco Digital Initiative and others running related projects. These include the Archaeological Data Service (Julian Richards at York University), BCR's Collaborative Digitization Program, the Nautical Archaeology Digital Library at Texas A&M, the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, and the Center for the Study of First Americans at Texas A&M.
Hire a business planning consultant to help us develop a plan for long-term fiscal sustainability for both the resulting digital prototype, with an eye toward maintaining the sales revenues of participating presses.
Consult with Kate Wittenberg, who oversaw the American Historical Association's Gutenberg-e project for the publication of all-digital first monographs that included various forms of supporting data.
Consult with the Society for Architectural Historians, whose digitization of the Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (JSAH) dovetails in important ways with aspects of our digital monograph project.
Investigate existing digital content platforms, including DSpace, Content DM (OCLC), Connexions (Rice University Press), IBT, Tizra Publisher, 37 Signals, Backpack, and Ebrary. As with the host repositories, this process may ultimately involve a more official RFP process.
Consult with Open Access specialists such as Allyson Mower at the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah to investigate the feasibility and sustainability of Open Access models and Creative Commons Licenses.
Meet with legal counsel to discuss the salient copyright and licensing issues, the relevant partnership agreements, and any adjustments to existing book contracts that may be required to address the varied content of our multi-media platform.
Investigate and vet potential programmers as required-including some already consulted as well as relevant IT staff on campuses of group members-if an existing digital content platform does not sufficiently meet the needs of our project.
In our discussions with digital repositories, archaeological data aggregators, digital platform hosts, and programmers, we will (1) evaluate the inventory of what our potential partners have to offer as well as the cost of those offerings, (2) investigate their current and expected future capabilities, and (3) explore their interests and plans for the next several years. In particular, we will be interested in their track records with past projects and their sources of capital for future projects, with an eye toward proven and sustainable partners. Once the digital monograph prototype is in place, we can use this information to establish criteria for the most germane and feasible collaborations as we move forward with the implementation phase.
Meet with relevant staff of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to discuss their vision and goals for the project.
Consult with other Andrew W. Mellon Foundation grantees receiving collaborative grants in order to get a sense of potential pitfalls and hurdles so that we can avoid totally reinventing the collaboration wheel.
Produce a final report and implementation plan. The implementation plan must be elastic enough to adjust to new online models that may appear in the near future. Guthrie and his colleagues emphasize the need for flexibility, noting that "project leaders . . . must continually ask whether they are headed in the right direction and be prepared to adapt when necessary" (Guthrie et al. 2008: 7). At the end of the planning year, in addition to the producing a final report and implementation plan, the other tangible objectives are to (1) hire a project manager; (2) identify a platform host; (3) narrow down a platform program; and (4) develop a flexible, basic prototype for the digital monograph that can be adapted in what may very well turn out to be somewhat dissimilar fashions by our collaborating presses during the implementation phase.