Striving for Osteological Ethics through Collective Pondering Across Southeast Asia

Tatfeef Haque1,2*, Edwin Miguel Anadon3, CHOY Ker Woon4, CHU Yih-Ning Elaine5, HEO Chong Chin6, Toetik Koesbardiati7, LEE Hin-Shin Winsome8,9, LIU Chin-Hsin10, Delta Bayu Murti7, NHOEM Sophorn11, Patara Rattanachet12, Erwin Mansyur U. Saraka13, Kathleen Felise Constance Tantuico14, TRẦN Thị Minh15,16, Sarah Agatha Villavuz15,17, YEO Wan Xian8, Naruphol Wangthongchaicharoen19, Nandar Yukti20, Pratiwi Yuwono21, and Michael Rivera2,22, 23

1Faculty of Science, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; 2Hong Kong Osteological Research Team (HKORT), Hong Kong; 3International Committee of the Red Cross, Manila Delegation, Philippines; 4Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia; 5Department of Anthropology, Texas State University, USA; 6Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia; 7Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia; 8Department of Bioarchaeology, The University of Warsaw, Poland; 9Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; 10Department of Anthropology, California State University, USA; 11Archaeology and Development Foundation, Cambodia; 12Siriraj Anatomical and Anthropological Bone Research Centre, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand; 13Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Cultural Science, Hasanuddin University, Indonesia; 14Kent Law School, The University of Kent, United Kingdom; 15School of Archaeology, University of the Philippines Diliman, Philippines; 16Institute of Archaeology, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, Vietnam; 17Department of Behavioral Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila, Philippines; 18Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Singapore; 19Department of Archaeology, Silpakorn University, Thailand; 20SNA International, USA; 21Geoarchaeology and Archaeometry Research Group (GARG), Southern Cross University, Australia; 22Faculty of Social Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; 23The HKU Bone Collection, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong; *tatfeefhaque@gmail.com

Professor Victor J. Paz was an advocate for sharing brave spaces and having the difficult discussions necessary to improve archaeological theory and practice. In this spirit, we present qualitative research on the necropolitics of Southeast Asia, using a semi‑autoethnographic approach conducted by osteologists working across sub‑disciplines including bioarchaeology, forensic anthropology, human evolutionary studies, anatomy, and clinical research. We illustrate the experiences of researchers as both community members (the emic perspective) and as experts (the etic perspective). This dialogue, informed by introspection, provides a transparent way to articulate the challenges encountered and perspectives gained through working with human remains in Southeast Asia, which often involves multiple and diverse engagements. Throughout our analysis, we were reminded that: (i) working in Southeast Asia means that researchers’ ethical approaches are shaped by their interactions with local communities and their dead; (ii) our work is informed by social and ideological norms, and by varying contexts and capacities for public engagement, scientific practice, and ethical thinking; and (iii) the importance of embracing the dynamism of ethical engagements, recognising that ethical decision‑making is not always easily addressed by written guidelines. We propose that an educational and reflexive approach, with built‑in goals of mentorship and capacity‑building, could form the backbone of future charters, guidelines, and protocols. We must also make room for mistakes and disagreements, allowing colleagues and students to navigate more effectively the social, cultural, and political death‑worlds from which we are inherently inseparable.