Create a green website

Would you like a website of your own, or to revamp your existing website?

Would you like to make your website greener, so that it hardly contributes at all to climate change?

Would you like to understand more about how websites are built, and pick up some basic coding skills?

If you answered yes to any of the above, then this workshop could be for you. Over 2 days, you’ll create your own website, using our free low carbon website building platform. If you come with text and images ready to go, the whole website should be ready to go by the end of the second day.

Once you have finished your website, it will be hosted for free on a server powered by renewable energy. The only costs your website will incur will be the domain name and a CDN where videos and images will be stored. You can choose your own providers for these, or we will offer suggestions. (SHL Digital can also provide small grants to participants, to cover you for the first 2-3 years at least).

The workshop will be led by two folk from Fast Familiar, who created the platform and will be there to support you with the process every step of the way. 

Where will the workshop happen?

19 June: University of Sussex Campus (closest station Falmer), in the Sussex Digital Humanities Lab, Silverstone Building

26 June: University of Sussex Campus (closest station Falmer), room TBC

When will the workshop happen?

19 June, 10:00-16:00 (lunch provided)

26 June, 10:00-16:00 (lunch provided)

How do I sign up?

You can apply to participate here.

What do I need to bring?

Please bring with you as much as you can of the text for the website pages you want to create, and the images and videos you want to use. As there is a week between the two days of the workshop, don’t worry if you don’t have all the text and images with you that you will eventually need, as you can write it in between day 1 and day 2. It would probably be helpful for you to bring your own laptop to work on, as that will be what you will use to edit the site later.

Below is some information about why we built a low carbon website builder and why it matters:

Why do low carbon websites matter?

These days, every artist, creative or organisation needs a web presence – it’s how we communicate what we do, demonstrate track record or legitimacy, and make ourselves available to be offered work.

Platforms like Squarespace, WordPress and Wix have made it possible for people without coding skills to build their own site – which is great. Often these platforms have capacities or affordances built into them that we don’t use if we’re basically just looking to put a portfolio of work and contact details online. These affordances and other aspects of the off-the-peg solutions mean that the site is using more energy than it needs to – which means the server it sits on and the devices of the people accessing it are using more electricity than they need to as well. Currently not all of our electricity comes from renewable sources, so this means the site is contributing to climate change.

The impact of digital activity on climate change is often less obvious than something like driving a car or heating your house with a gas boiler because the activity takes place thousands of miles away, on server farms, many of which are in ‘Data Center Alley’ in Virginia, a state powered by fossil fuels.

You might be reading this thinking, ‘my tiny website is a drop in the ocean compared to aviation/ international shipping/ the activities of fossil fuel giants like BP and Shell’ or ‘a carbon footprint is a made-up thing, a concept invented by aforementioned fossil fuel giants to make climate change an individual problem, rather than something they take responsibility for.’ You’d be right on both counts.

FF absolutely recognises the need for structural change, regulation, investment in new technologies and other ‘big picture’ interventions. But that doesn’t mean we don’t also want to reflect on how the choices we make contribute to climate change – and how we could take climate action instead. (In one of the interviews we did for a past project, The Networked Condition, artist Memo Akten talks about his thoughts on individual responsibility in a far more articulate way than we could.)

So we’ve been working on a tool to let artists, creatives and small organisations build a website which doesn’t contribute to climate change.

FAQs

How have you made it zero-carbon?

In a nutshell, 100% of the electricity used in the process of building and hosting the site is from carbon neutral sources, e.g. wind or hydro-electric.

The website builder itself is really lightweight and can be hosted on micro-servers – these are smaller servers that use a fraction of the typical energy a server would use, so building and hosting the sites takes less electricity, plus we’ve chosen providers where 100% of that electricity is green.

We’ve also only used third-parties who are verifiably carbon neutral and have committed to sustaining neutrality or carbon negative practices. If you are interested, these are Hetzner and Microsoft.

It’s all very well getting your own house -or site- in order but you don’t have any control over what electricity the visitors to your site are using for their device and router. So the websites that the site builder makes are ‘static websites’, which means that visitors to the site use less bandwidth (and therefore less electricity) to view them. Static here doesn’t mean that you can’t have moving things and videos, it means your site is a bunch of code which doesn’t require fancy databases or a responsive server.

You say it’s a prototype – what happens if I put a load of work into using it to build a site and then you discontinue it, will I lose all my work?

Not at all, our site builder is built to be data-redundant, we just provide a user interface to make editing the files easier. Behind the scenes the site builder uses an open-sourced website framework called Jekyll, paired with Github Pages for hosting. If we discontinue the website builder, your website will continue to work on Github Pages and you can still edit files there.

Why is it free? Where’s the catch?

There isn’t one – honestly. It’s free because it should be and because we’re lucky enough to have an arts funder in this country who supported its creation (Arts Council England).

What do Fast Familiar get out of it?

Nothing. It’s something we wanted to make happen.

I’m really not a technical person, will I be able to use the tool?

We’ll be honest, it is more complicated to use than an off-the-peg solution – because we haven’t had the funding to build a slick user interface. BUT that is why we are running the workshops, to help you through any bits that are slightly less intuitive. And, as a bonus, you will learn a little bit about basic coding along the way.

Are there tutorial documents?

Yes there are, which means that when you want to tweak things after the workshops, there will be the information easily available to do the things you want to do.

Will my site look like everyone else’s who uses the tool? I’m a unique iNdIViduAL you know.

No, the tool lets you use a range of different themed templates. If you’re more confident with coding, you can also significantly adapt these themes to suit your needs, but we hope that even without that, everyone should be able to find a theme that suits them.

Yeah, but you haven’t answered my question, I have a different question 

Drop an email to Dan and Jo at dan(at)fastfamiliar(dot)com and j(dot)c(dot)walton(at)sussex(dot)com.

Branch #8 + Pause

Branch is a magazine about sustainable and just internet for all. It is edited and funded by the Green Web Foundation on behalf of the volunteer-run Climate Action.tech community. One of the many cool things about Branch is that it exists in three different versions, according to the carbon intensity of the energy grid at any given moment (so the heavier assets, like high resolution pictures, can be delivered by renewable energy). The fantastic issue #8 has just launched, edited by Hannah Smith and Marketa Benisek.

The Sussex Digital Humanities Lab has a little contribution in #8, in the form of an article by Jo Lindsay Walton, as well as an article by GreenPixie’s Rory Brown, whom we’re collaborating with on Digital Sustainability 2024. And there’s plenty more …

Editors’ letter
Hannah Smith and Marketa Benisek

10 people share what finding beauty in the imperfect means to them

Issue 8 community-assembled playlist
Hannah Smith and Lima Dastgeer

Meaningful connection

Talking it out: Restoring information ecosystems through authentic human connections
Bárbara Paes and Olivia Johnson

One Movement, Four Wings: Connecting climate strategies
Melissa Hsiung

Connectivity, infrastructure and the defence of the Amazon’s socio-biodiverse ecosystems
Hemanuel Veras

What can digital sustainability learn from accessibility?
Mike Masey

Solarpunk and speculative features

Pause
Jo Lindsay Walton

Care for life, care for the chips: the future is re-used, recycled and permacomputing
Alistair Alexander

Toward a Pragmatic Future: Accepting Imperfect Systems whilst Striving for Regeneration
Oliver Cronk

Solarpunk Meets Better Business: Reimagining a Sustainable Digital Future
Simon Blackler

Ministry of Imagination Manifesto
Rob Hopkins

Octavia’s Future is Here, Now What
Mica Le John

Design philosophy

Designing Friction
Marketa Benisek, Luna Maurer, Roel Wouters

The Wabi Sabi Web
Tom Greenwood

Echoes of electronic waste
Joanna Murzyn

Imperfect design for a better future
Thorsten Jonas

Alternative networks: Consciously designing from within earthly dynamics
Jesse Thompson

Perfection is the enemy of progress

The perfect site doesn’t exist
Michelle Barker

Rabbit holes of perfection
Mary Pitt

From bytes to carbon savings: Immediate’s sustainable transformation of Good Food
Tommy Ferry, Marketa Benisek, Michelle Whitehead, Linzi Ricketts, Filippa Furniss, Graham Martin

Small steps, big goals: Building sustainable change
Kim Lea Rothe

The perfect data paradox
Rory Brown

Green Digital Skills Opportunity

How does digital technology impact the environment? How do we align our growing use of AI and the cloud with the needs of people and planet? SHL Digital is pleased to be offering these free digital sustainability workshops, for selected participants, as part of our project Designing Sustainable Digital Futures, which comes under the Digital Sustainability 2024 umbrella.

The Future of Digital Sustainability. This half-day workshop at The Werks (Middle Street) in Brighton, on May 30th, will explore how organisations can accelerate their green IT journey. We’ll be focusing on arts, culture, and heritage organisations. What are the easy changes you can make right away? What are the bigger shifts that will require sectoral collaboration or policy shifts? How can you engage your audiences and other stakeholders? Whether you use digital technology a lot or just a little, there should be something here for you. Apply for your place here.

Build a Carbon Neutral Website. This two-day in-person workshop (19th June and 26th June at the University of Sussex) will teach you how to use Jekyll, Github Pages, and the Digital Climate Action Site Builder to create your own carbon neutral website. Applicants should have a real web design project that they want to bring to life. Brought to you by Fast Familiar, SHL Digital, and the Digital Humanities Climate Coalition. Apply for your place here.

Designing the Future of Digital Sustainability. This half-day workshop in South Kensington in London, on June 6th, will use of design, serious play, and collaborative storytelling, to explore the future of digital technologies in relation to climate change, climate action, and climate justice. Apply for your place here.

Please note that places are quite limited. Applicants will be informed at least two weeks before the workshop date if their applications are successful. We do hope also to add one remote workshop, so watch this space!

Communicating Climate Risk: A Toolkit

SHL Digital is pleased to announce the latest edition of Communicating Climate Risk: A Toolkit. Originating in a climate risk communication project from COP26 Universities Network (now UK Universities Climate Network), this publication was updated and expanded in 2022 and again this year. Weaving contributions by climate scientists and modellers and social scientists together with decolonial, postdevelopment, and ecocritical approaches within the arts and humanities, and informed by fieldwork with policymakers and stakeholders, it explores the social life of ‘climate risk’ across a variety of vital domains.

Delving into the complexities of IPCC reporting, green bonds and ESG labels, and decision analysis under deep uncertainty, Communicating Climate Risk nevertheless seeks always to speak to a broad audience, and to not only shine light into the obscure forces that are shaping the future of our world and our planet, but also provide resources, models, and inspiration for action.

See also:

Digital Sustainability 2024

Digital Sustainability 2024 is an initiative of the Sussex Digital Humanities Lab and the Digital Humanities Climate Coalition. Digital technology represents a significant and rapidly growing proportion of global carbon emissions. With time nearly run out to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, and climate change impacts more visible than every, it’s clear we need bold and intelligent action on multiple fronts. Digital carbon is an important piece of this puzzle. Digital technologies also have a range of environmental impacts beyond just their carbon footprint. At the same time, the digital has important contributions to make to net zero, climate risk management, and environmental sustainability. We’ll be exploring these complexities.

Key open access outputs will include:

  • The Cloud and the Climate: A Report — what does cloud sustainability look like in 2024
  • Digital Sustainability Game — an immersive storytelling and strategy game about the future of digital sustainability

Some strands include:

  • Collecting and sharing best practice around procuring and managing ICT systems
  • Identifying, investigating and curating relevant standards, certifications, and tooling, and informing development of those currently in the works
  • The role of games, play, storytelling and the arts in driving digital sustainability

Pop open Digital Sustainability 2024, and you’ll find three projects inside:

1) Designing the Future of Cloud Carbon Data is funded by Innovate UK and delivered with industry partner GreenPixie. This project is all about the cloud. The cloud exists in hyperscale data centres, which can deliver sustainability efficiencies that are out-of-reach for many on-premise data centres. It’s very tempting to think we should move everything to the cloud, and let AWS, Azure and Google figure out the details — and a few years ago, this was widely thought to be a good idea. But there is increasing recognition that the public cloud is not a one-size-fits-all solution. For many companies, a hybrid solution may be the way forward.

One current challenge is that tools such as AWS’ Customer Carbon Footprint Tool, Microsoft’s Sustainability Manager, and Google Cloud’s Carbon Footprint Tool, fail to accurately capture actual emissions. Complementary location-based carbon measurement tools have been developed (both proprietary and open source), but typically require a lot of dedicated technical expertise to operate. We want to explore ways of getting accurate cloud carbon data to a much wider user base.

A second major issue is supply chain. There are many businesses for whom Scope 3 makes up the majority of emissions. But it can be tricky enough to figure out your own cloud carbon emissions — how do you go about engaging suppliers about their cloud emissions? How can sustainability, IT and procurement functions best work together to drive real change? We want to hear about your experiences to date, to develop and share best practice in this area.

A third issue is the relationship between economic, environmental, and social sustainability. If you’re spending more money, you’re typically using more energy, so these often track together. But this isn’t always the case, so how do we identify those moments where price isn’t a good proxy for sustainability, and how do we address the tricky trade-offs that may emerge?

2) Designing Sustainable Digital Futures is funded by the AHRC IAA Design and AI Accelerator, and is part of Future Observatory, the Design Museum’s national research programme for the green transition. This project is broader and more entry level than the first. The digital is deeply interwoven into our everyday lives and work, but the systems we rely on remain mysterious to many of us. On this project, we’ll be exploring how the arts, storytelling and design can illuminate the complexities of digital sustainability for diverse audiences, and guide organisations toward sustainable digital futures. Designing Sustainable Digital Futures is interested in engaging all organisations interested in improving digital sustainability, no matter where you may be in your journey. Some of our priorities include:

  • SMEs
  • Creative industries 
  • Culture and heritage organisations
  • Third sector

In addition to digital-themed workshops, we are also offering opportunities to host experiential workshops on the Sustainable Development Goals, to place digital sustainability within a much wider context.

3) Automating Climate Mitigation Advisory Services is funded by the AHRC IAA. The sustainability consulting industry is now in enormous demand, as companies seek to navigate the complexities of net zero and climate risk. We are seeing the rise of new approaches to third party sustainability support, including curated and facilitated toolkits, as well as experiments in automation. This project, building on the back of a previous HEIF-funded collaboration with Hampshire Cultural Trust and Greenly, will explore the relationship between clients, climate advisors, and advisory tools.

We’re working with Greenly to gain insights about the practicalities of constructing decarbonisation strategies for a diverse range of organisations. How do you go from high-level, generic evidence to on-the-ground operational changes? We’ll be conducting expert interviews, and also sharing our own expertise and experience in climate-related communication and in sustainable AI and ICT specifically.

How can you get involved in Digital Sustainability 2024? If your business or organisation is interested in improving the environmental impacts of your digital technology, feel free to reach out. Contact j.c.walton@sussex.ac.uk, or fill out this survey.

Digital Sustainability 2024 Team

  • Jo Lindsay Walton (Lead)
  • Josephine Lethbridge (Co-Lead)
  • Nathalie Huegler
  • Florence Okoye
  • Kinda Al Sayed
  • Faosiyat Tiamiyu-Tijani

Generative AI and HE assessment: What do we need to research?

By Jo Walton

Would you like to collaborate on something?

There are a lot of fascinating ongoing conversations about the use of generative AI within HE, and especially the issues it raises for assessment. Kelly Coate, writing for WonkHE, characterizes it as a moral panic, but still a potentially useful one:

If in academia we value things like authenticity, integrity, and originality, we need to be able to articulate why those values remain important in the age of generative AI. Doing this can only help students to make meaning from their higher education learning experience – in fact, it’s really what we should have been doing all along.

Our sense is that there are now many particular well-defined questions which could do with being studied in a more rigorous way, to move these conversations forward. How good are educators at identifying AI-generated text? How good are educators at evaluating their own ability to identify such text? What differences emerge across different assessment designs? How about different disciplines? If AI is deliberately included in the assessment, how accurately can assessors evaluate whether it has been used appropriately? How does the variation in grades assigned compare across non-AI-asssessed work and various types of AI-assisted work? These are all questions we can address from our own experience and miniature experiments. But it would be valuable to conduct some studies at scale, and have some data to debate.

SHL Digital would be keen to hear from colleagues, at Sussex or beyond, who are working on these issues or would be interesting in collaborating. Get in touch with j.c.walton@sussex.ac.uk.

What we talk about, when we talk about apocalypse

  • Jo Lindsay Walton, Sussex Digital Humanities Lab, University of Sussex
  • Polina Levontin, Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London

‘The world is ending’, ‘the Earth will be uninhabitable’, ‘humans are going extinct’, ‘we are f⸻’. These are not uncommon sentiments when climate change comes up in university seminar rooms, often accompanied by nervous laughter. Against a background of rising eco-anxiety, how do we talk with students about climate change?

As universities move to embed sustainability across curricula, climate change is coming up more frequently. Educators in fields far removed from Earth Sciences may find themselves grappling with the complexities of climate science. Should we take these despairing statements seriously … and when and how should we counter them?

First, let’s be clear. It is very unlikely that the whole planet will become uninhabitable for humans any time soon. While the risks associated with climate change remain extremely high, the IPCC (the global body responsible for climate science) has lowered its upper bound predictions from about 5℃ to about 3℃, largely due to progress on renewable energy. The current median estimate of IPCC Earth Systems models is 2.2℃. 

Continue reading “What we talk about, when we talk about apocalypse”

Sussex Humanities Lab PhD Spring Symposium: Experimental, Interactive and Playful Research Methodologies 

By El Priest and Hanna Randall

In April, the SHL hosted a PhD Spring Symposium on experimental, interactive and playful research methodologies, which was organised by El Priest and Hanna Randall. The day was full of workshops, papers, and art marking. We had art materials freely available on the table for attendees to use as and when they liked; aiming to engender a sense of freedom, playfulness and creativity. 

The day started with El’s paper and workshop on queer archiving and zine making. The paper focused on alternative epistemology and knowledges produced through queer methods of history making. Participants were encouraged to consider their own experiences and relationships as a source for emotionally engaged history making, to the end of producing a more community-informed account of the past. The zine making workshop and free use of the art materials helped attendees relax and make connections with one another in a creative environment.  

We enjoyed a paper from Anthony Trory who discussed his research project on designing interactive prototypes to use as the materials in school-based learning science experiments. Anthony’s research aims to improve understanding of how a designer can optimise a child’s progression from concrete to abstract using the theory of ‘concreteness fading’. Put more simply, he’s been developing a pirate-themed augmented reality iPad app that teaches primary school children how the internet works. We also enjoyed a paper from Ross McKendrick on psychogeography and the city as archive. Beginning with a research methodology rooted in an understanding of the city as an archive, and following Michael Sorkin’s conceptualisation of architecture as a ‘legible’ form, Ross thinks about how to conduct a ‘counter-archival’ practice in the city. By documenting uses of the city not prescribed by original planning ideals, the counter-archive can become a democratic tool which community stakeholders can utilise and contribute to as they see appropriate.   

After lunch, Rich Thornton and Effie Makepeace led us through a theatre/drama workshop that was designed to introduce participants to the idea of theatre as a participatory and creative research method through a series of non-threatening, practical and fun games, exercises and discussion. We engaged with tools adapted from Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed, such as Image Theatre, as way to demonstrate their potential through gentle practical discovery. We also paid attention to the queer and decolonial potential of prioritising knowledge which emerges from the body and how this might feed into other quantitative and qualitative methods.  

To end the day, artists Leonie Rousham and Ishwari Bhalerao facilitated a workshop on making prints using DIY photo developers using plants like calendula, cow parsley, hawthorn, willow and dandelion. Each participant’s print was intended to be their unique device to imagine/reflect upon/reframe their own relationship to time. These prints, made on photographic paper, change how they look over time, depending on their exposure to light. In the SHL garden, we discussed plants like Calendula, Dandelion, Willow, Hawthorn and Cow Parsley which have their own unique relationships to time, their medicinal properties, folklore and other fun facts. For example, calendula derives from the word ‘calen’ meaning ‘first day of the month’ as it blooms in every month of the year, and the willow tree, which grows near the water, shape shifts according to tidal bodies of water, the moon and our bodies. The above-mentioned plants contain phenols, which gives them the ability to react with photo-paper when mixed with a few other things. After choosing some plants to work with, participants made their own photo-developer and used the plants to draw and make marks to create photo prints which doubles up as a time telling/travelling/defining/defying device. 

The day allowed people from different disciplines, universities and creative practices to meet, discuss and have fun. We focused on centring the playful and creative in research practice in order to create an enjoyable and accessible environment for people to share their ideas. The event was hugely successful and lots of new friends, ideas and art pieces were made! 

What’s Your AI Idea?

Are you a Sussex researcher in the arts, humanities or social sciences, with an idea about how AI might be used in your work? Are you looking for some expert advice, and the chance to explore some collaboration?

If this sounds like you, submit your idea here, and/or get in touch with j.c.walton@sussex.ac.uk.

Weird AI-generated landscape
jbustterr / Better Images of AI / A monument surrounded by piles of books / CC-BY 4.0

AI and Archives

By Sharon Webb

The Sussex Humanities Lab was delighted to welcome speakers and delegates online and in-person to the AI and Archives Symposium last month (April 2023). The event, a collaboration between the Sussex Humanities Lab and two AHRC-IRC funded research projects, Full Stack Feminism in Digital Humanities and Women in Focus, was an opportunity to share interest in, knowledge of, and concerns with AI systems in archives and archival praxis.

I began by introducing the Lab itself, partly to provide context to the space in which the AI and Archives Symposium was being held, but also because it provided a useful foundation for thinking about the presenters’ many research areas. The AI and Archives Symposium spoke to SHL’s creative, critical, and collaborative approach to research: our programme has a wide disciplinary reach, from community archives to AI, media theory to conservation technology, critical heritage to intersectional feminism, digital humanities to experimental music technology and critical making. A perfect setting for this collision of past, present and futures: AI and Archives! What follows is an edited version of my introduction.


“AI and Archives” covers a lot of ground, and requires conversation that is critically engaged, creative and exploratory, and informed by feminist, queer and anti-racist ethics and approaches. The conversations around AI and Archives are collaborative across and within disciplinary boundaries – much like how SHL brings those elements uniquely together under one programme.  

The foundations of the symposium lie not in the current hype around AI but within dialogue to address or redress the historic and chronic under- and mis-representation of specific histories related to women, people of colour, LGBTQI+ communities, as well as the histories of individuals and communities who exist across multiple lines of identity politics and their intersections. Work in both projects, Women in Focus and Full Stack Feminism, considers how “archives”, as a place of knowledge, knowledge exchange, of power, disempowerment and empowerment, play a pivotal role in terms of acknowledging and celebrating the existence of alternative histories to those which form the traditional historic canon (mostly covering the domain of cis-white men, the victors and their conquests, trade and empire). Both projects, and indeed other projects related to SHL’s research cluster, Critical Digital Humanities and Archives, view archives as a place where identity lives, and where we can exemplify the contributions of those who have often been ignored, sidelined, and/or silenced, explicitly or otherwise.  

A critical aspect of the Women in Focus project is revisiting records in East Anglian Film Archives (EAFA) and Irish Film Archives (IFA), editing metadata and thereby revealing and acknowledging the role of women amateur filmmakers. These records range from short “home movies” to longer travelogues, and include a rich mix of topics. Revisiting and editing these records is labour-intensive. While the collection is relatively small (in comparison to other archival collections elsewhere), the task of reviewing each record and its associated object remains complex and time-consuming. The original metadata also speaks to this resource scarcity, as some descriptions are limited in scope and missing crucial detail about contributors to the resource. 

With this in mind, we thought about how computer vision might help generate descriptive metadata for moving-image archives. Of course, within digital humanities and computer science, there are many ongoing experiments exploring how AI might assist in identifying, describing, and/or tagging digital objects – the work of Lisa Jaillan, our first speaker, attests to this – but the current hype also demands some immediate responses. As AI tools multiply and grow mainstream, and potentials turn into realities, such work becomes timely, not least because of the problems of bias and discrimination which such systems can replicate and perpetuate.  

AI, machine learning, computer vision, and other automated methods have an allure for several reasons. For example, while the digitisation of historical records has developed considerably, archival methods of cataloguing (metadata descriptions) remain largely the same (manual, human). Automated methods can provide resource and quick fixes for an industry or service which faces dwindling resources despite ever-increasing content.  

The challenge we face is using AI for good – while anticipating, acknowledging and/or expecting elements which are/could be profoundly bad. A few years ago, Dr Ben Roberts, co-director of the lab, ran an AHRC Network grant called ‘Automation Anxiety‘. It explored contemporary attitudes toward automation, and framed them within the longer history of ‘automation anxieties’ related to mechanical devices. A notable example is, of course, the Luddites. Often misrepresented as mere technophobes, the Luddites quite rightly argued for more critical reflection on the economic and social consequences of technological change within textile manufacturing. Luddite perspectives were revived by Langdon Winner in the automation anxiety wave of the 1970s, and are attracting attention once more today.

There are many contexts in which we could discuss the topic of AI and Archives. Using AI to generate descriptive metadata, whether to describe text, moving image, audio, etc., can itself help with the problem of discoverability, which might in turn help to address the problem of biased training sets. AI being used to improve archives, archives being used to improve AI: perhaps we are amid a new archival turn!  

However, the scale of implementing these systems is not trivial, and nor are the associated environmental costs, including the carbon impacts of training and running AIs, and of running the servers where archival data is stored.  If AI removes the barrier of describing collections, does it also remove the barrier/process of appraising? We can/could possibly “save everything” but this preservation strategy would likely be at odds with climate change strategies – what additional pressure might digital archiving activities impose on our already delicate global ecosystem?

Like most people, I did ask ChatGPT to write something: ‘a 200 word abstract about AI and Archives’. Among its list of “benefits” it listed that “AI has the potential to automate many of the tedious tasks associated with archival work, such as cataloging and indexing”. And while this may of course be of benefit, we must question what the fallout of such an approach is. What does knowledge gain? What are the epistemological pitfalls of such an approach which removes the human? Is an archive a mere store for documents or do they serve a wider purpose? Conversations around AI and Archives, and digital material in general, do require us to think critically about the social and cultural role of archives, in our communities, in our societies. 

And to whom is this task “tedious”? This depends on the context – for community archives who are archiving their histories, this work is not tedious, it is an essential activity in terms of knowledge production, community identity and historical acknowledgment. If knowledge is power, then what happens when our knowledge production processes are no longer mediated through us, but rather done for us? Machine talking to machine, rather than one human (the archivists) talking with a researcher.  

Archiving in these contexts provides a close reading of the artifacts. The archival process itself is a meaningful exchange with history. This is not a “tedious task” but an important intergenerational passing of knowledge, of culture, of life experience. Wrapped in this context, we know ethics should be a driving force for any conversation or experiments with AI technologies. AI is maths after all – if we don’t calculate the parameters, who will!  


A summary of the event and speakers will follow in the next few weeks, but perhaps the most enduring thought for me was that we do not experience these technologies equally. Nor do we experience heritage and archives in the same way – questioning representation and questioning our individual experiences and responses is imperative. How we “handle” heritage objects and their interpretation must be informed by collective, community driven activities and dialogue. Archives and heritage objects are not merely objects: they represent stories, experiences, life, death, hurt, violence, trauma, and joy. Critically, they represent human sentience, and whether AI will read these objects in this way is still yet to be seen.