p. 1

archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions edited by nathan schlanger and kenneth aitchison

[close]

p. 2

published 2010 by culture lab editions elisabethlaan 4 b-3080 tervuren belgium www.culturelab.be isbn 978-2-9600527-7-0 produced on behalf of archaeology in contemporary europe professional practices and public outreach designed by pascale coulon copyright © culturelab and individual authors this publication has been produced with the support of the european commission through the culture 2007-2013 programme in the framework of the ace project ­ archaeology in contemporary europe professional practices and public outreach the european commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained herein all contributors to this publication have done so in their personal capacity the views and analyses expressed here remain their authors sole responsibility and do not necessarily reflect or represent those of the publishers the sponsoring organisations their institutions or the european commission cover photo archaeologists defending higher education research and employment paris january 2009 photo nathan schlanger download pdf file at http ace-archaeology.eu/fichiers/25archaeology-and-the-crisis.pdf

[close]

p. 3

archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions edited by nathan schlanger and kenneth aitchison

[close]

p. 4

[close]

p. 5

contents preface and acknowledgments 7 9 1 introduction archaeology and the global economic crisis nathan schlanger kenneth aitchison 2 the crisis ­ economic ideological and archaeological jean-paul demoule 13 3 the impact of the recession on archaeology in the republic of ireland james eogan 4 united kingdom archaeology in economic crisis kenneth aitchison 2 19 5 the end of a golden age the impending effects of the economic collapse on archaeology in higher education in the united kingdom 31 anthony sinclair 6 commercial archaeology in spain its growth development and the impact of the global economic crisis 4 eva parga-dans 7 a crisis with many faces the impact of the economic recession on dutch archaeology monique h van den dries karen e waugh corien bakker 8 one crisis too many french archaeology between reform and relaunch nathan schlanger kai salas rossenbach 9 the crisis and changes in cultural heritage legislation in hungary cul-de-sac or solution 81 eszter bánffy pál raczky 10 archaeology in crisis the case of poland arkadiusz marciniak michal pawleta 87 69 11 the impact of the economic crisis on rescue archaeology in russia asya engovatova 97 12 the effect of the global recession on cultural resources management in the united states 103 jeffry h altschul 13 postscript on dead canaries guinea-pigs and other trojan horses nathan schlanger 14 annex i job losses in uk archaeology april 2010 kenneth aitchison 107 117 15 annex ii note for administrators and liquidators of archaeological organisations roger m thomas abstracts in english 131 résumés en français 13 deutsche zusammenfassungen resúmenes en español 144 127 139

[close]

p. 6

[close]

p. 7

archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions edited by nathan schlanger kenneth aitchison 2010 ace culture lab editions 7 preface and acknowledgments the texts presented here are extended and updated versions of the papers given at a session entitled archaeology and the global crisis multiple impacts possible solutions held on the 17th september 2009 at the 15th annual meeting of the european association of archaeologists eaa in riva del garda italy as coorganisers of this session we were particularly happy to see that over a hundred colleagues attended and took part in some lively discussions where sober realism was mixed with hope and determination the session furthermore benefitted from the friendly atmosphere and excellent organisation of the eaa meeting itself as skilfully orchestrated by franco nicolis together with martina dalla riva their teams and sponsors indeed the european association of archaeologists as a whole so we feel has amply fulfilled its vocation as meeting-ground and think-tank for professional archaeologists from europe and beyond http www.e-a-a.org we are grateful in any case that our session at riva del garda was sponsored ­ in an intellectual sense ­ by three eaa committees or working parties one is the committee on archaeological legislation and organisation in europe chaired by christopher young and jean-paul demoule the crisis and the structural changes that follow make the critical and comparative work of this committee more important than ever before further support was received from the committee on professional associations in archaeology chaired by kenneth aitchison a committee that is acutely concerned with working practices in european archaeology and how they are being affected by the economic situation the third and most recently created of these eaa groups is the working party on ace archaeology in contemporary europe professional practices and public outreach www.ace-archaeology eu ­ a european commission `culture programme funded network gathering a dozen of partners from across the continent to examine together the fields of practice and social dimensions of contemporary archaeology in addition to the invaluable material support provided by the ace network many of its partners contributed their comments and insights to the preparation of the `crisis session and also through subsequent meetings in thessaloniki with our aristotle university partner and in budapest with our kÖh partner in this volume ace partners have contributed the chapters on the situations in the netherlands spain france and poland another relevant european initiative is the discovering the archaeologists of europe project www.discovering-archaeologists.eu a review of the archaeological labour market in twelve european union states with the support of the european commission `leonardo da vinci programme in 2006-2008 as data for the project were collected in 2007 at the height of the economic cycle they give us very valuable information and insights for critical comparisons with the ongoing crisis situation.

[close]

p. 8

8 archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions thanks are due of course to all the contributors to the session as is frequently the case not all the papers given there could be included in the present publication for various reasons this could be compensated however by a couple of new chapters which fit well with the volume s aims and coverage we thank all the authors for working under a tight schedule and for responding to several last minute requests while the authors retain full responsibility for the contents of their contributions it is us as editors who will have to be excused for any eventual typos repetitions or misplaced hyphenations that may have remained during the accelerated production process of this publication ka would like to thank the following peter hinton michael dawson and gerry wait for commenting on draft texts and all colleagues on the committee for professional associations in archaeology whose discussions contributed directly or indirectly to the genesis of this volume ns would like to thank friends and colleagues in the ace network and at the eaa for their discussions and encouragement thanks are also due to inrap the lead-partner of the ace network and especially to the cultural development and communication team for their advice and support in the preparation of this volume the same goes to pascale coulon who so efficiently put together at such short notice the disparate files and images into the shape of a proper publication the ace coordination team sonia lévin and kai salas rossenbach were as always here to improve and smooth things out notably regarding the quadrilingual abstracts which have been translated by juliette guilbaud into german by kai salas rossenbach into spanish and in some cases through the individual authors finally special thanks to our publisher culture lab editions for unwavering support nathan schlanger and kenneth aitchison august 2010

[close]

p. 9

archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions edited by nathan schlanger kenneth aitchison 2010 ace culture lab editions 9 1 introduction archaeology and the global economic crisis nathan schlanger kenneth aitchison nathan schlanger ace project ­ `archaeology in contemporary europe institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives paris nathan.schlanger@inrap.fr kenneth aitchison head of projects and professional development institute for archaeologists uk kenneth.aitchison@archaeologists.net this is probably the first multi-authored attempt to take a global or at least international look at the current economic crisis and its effects on archaeology archaeologists of course have always shown much professional interest in crises even if only from a distance there have been as we know many and varied crises throughout human history natural disasters such as earthquakes flash floods or droughts or human-created famines epidemics and wars have all left tangible traces in the archaeological record subject to much research and numerous interpretations economic crises for their part are probably more difficult to identify in the record what can be found of the 1630s tulipmania speculative bubble in holland of the commercial blockades of the napoleonic wars or indeed of the wall street collapse of 1929 but while economic crises may be elusive to grasp as archaeological events and processes in the remote past they are certainly impossible to miss when as has been the case since 2008 they hit the profession at full force unmistakable as they may be however the effects of the current economic crisis on archaeology still need to be detailed elaborated and analysed ­ this broadly speaking is what the present volume begins to do at the onset it has not seemed to us necessary to propose here any strict or even encompassing definition of the crisis in the current context everyone will readily gather that we are talking about this sharp economic recession that settled over much of the world following a series of catastrophic financial events that began to unfold in the united states in 2007 the overexposure of many banks there in lending to `subprime borrowers led to an unprecedented financial shock to the entire economic system across the western world which has continued ­ in differing forms ­ until the present day most contributors provide further details regarding their respective countries and sectors including quantitative information and projections without for that transforming their texts into macro-economic dissertations in fact alongside the sheer mass of data and numbers it is striking to note just how rapidly has this notion of `global economic crisis become something of a collective representation a shared syndrome a fateful mantra that leaves much leeway for interpretation extension or application without delving here too deeply into the socio-linguistics or semantics of the term `crisis the politics of its uses nevertheless call for comment as it permeates both ordinary and professional discourse this notion finds itself expediently and strategically employed in the name of the crisis sometimes by its mere mention actions are legitimised decisions are delayed expectations are raised plans shelved procedures reconfigured pills sweetened plugs pulled and so forth so while the `crisis is emphatically here with us at least for the foreseeable future we really cannot take its presence and its implications at face value without some prior critical consideration or contextualisation this applies to all of us in general as citizens as voters and as taxpayers but also specifically to the fields of archaeology and archaeological heritage management that concern

[close]

p. 10

10 archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions us firstly we need to remember that many different patterns and processes have been going on before the crisis a truism this may be we still need to acknowledge however briefly and partially that such antecedents help us set the crisis in perspective and better understand its impacts that the countries described in this volume each have their different archaeological traditions systems and configurations is something we all know ­ it can however be novel and illuminating to appreciate these differences through the singular prism of the crisis together with that we need also to consider what goes on alongside the crisis while the current events focus our immediate concerns it would be far too easy for us ­ and indeed for our elected representatives our political and economical decision makers ­ to refer and defer all choices and policies to the crisis alongside continuities or attempts to return `back to normality in heritage management we can also expect some broad changes and reorientations to occur which their instigators may claim to be simply accelerated facilitated or indeed rendered inevitable by the crisis this may well be so but it is our responsibility as the professionals directly involved to remain alert and examine these changes for their worth on a case-by-case basis as can be seen the crisis is indeed a complex matter the impacts of which upon archaeology are likely to be multiple and far-reaching ­ on the practice of the discipline on its practitioners and ultimately on the knowledge we produce and disseminate about the past our guiding hypothesis as presented at the eaa session that is at the origin of this publication is that to a greater or lesser extent all sectors of archaeology will ultimately be affected this has led us to distinguish with admittedly a certain degree of arbitrariness as well as overlap between four major themes or impact areas for each we raise a series of issues or possibilities which could when substantiated generate further thought and discussion ­ the first theme concerns the impact of the crisis on research funding and priorities we would like to know whether the budgets dedicated to research be they structural or project based in universities or research bodies have been affected by the crisis in terms of available funding evaluation criteria types of projects selected eligible expenditures etc ­ the second theme which has initially attracted the most attention for obvious reasons concerns the impact of the crisis on professional employment here the issues are of employment job security recruitment and redundancies notably in commercial archaeology this in turn relates to the health and prospects of various archaeological employers in both public and private sectors a further issue concerns professional training and skills by higher education institutions and by employers ­ and how they are to be maintained in in times of crisis ­ the third theme which proves perhaps too early to fully grasp has to do with the impact of the crisis on conservation and public outreach policies this concerns not only the fate of archaeological documentation and finds as studied curated and stored by field workers or by museums but also that of the various activities personnel publications exhibitions etc which are aimed at communication and public outreach ­ at a time when the broader public s interest in the past and its value may need to be reassessed ­ the fourth theme has to do with the impact of the crisis on heritage management policies and legislation in question here are the various structural policy and legal modifications that follow from ­ or are amplified accelerated or alternatively delayed by ­ various official or governmental responses to the crisis these include changes in the legal definition of `archaeological sites changes in

[close]

p. 11

introduction archaeology and the global economic crisis 11 the intensity monitoring timing or funding of protective measures the merging of heritage management institutions or their functions the effects of economic `new deals and re-launch initiatives etc with different degrees of detail the contributors to this volume have addressed these four themes providing the reader with an in-depth comparative picture of the multiple impacts of the global economic crisis on archaeology in the case of archaeology in the united kingdom the themes in question are actually dealt with in several papers mainly employment-related issues by kenneth aitchison in his chapter and in annex i research and higher education by anthony sinclair and matters pertaining to legislation and heritage management by roger thomas in annex ii in other cases the contributors have touched on all themes in their papers arkadiusz marciniak and michal pawleta for poland nathan schlanger and kai salas rossenbach for france and more succinctly james eogan for ireland most contributors have focused on a particular sector broadly speaking that of archaeological heritage management this is either because in comparison with the other impact areas the evidence was particularly rich or topical in that sector ­ as in the paper by monique van den dries karen waugh and corien bakker on the netherlands and that by eva parga-dans on spain ­ or because there were useful quantitative or qualitative leads to follow as did asya engovatova for russia eszter bánffy and pál raczky for hungary or jeffrey altschul for the united states whatever the case this volume as a whole focuses mainly on matters relating to archaeological heritage management interestingly this focus is conveyed through a range of largely overlapping terms used by the contributors many talk of `preventive archaeology and others mention `rescue archaeology the `industrial sector `commercial archaeology `cultural resources management `developer-funded `compliance driven and indeed `professional as distinct from `academic archaeology we considered it important as editors to respect this terminological variability which in some cases reflects some real conceptual or even ideological differences but which also rests on a common underlying basis ­ which can be conveyed by the relatively clear and neutral term of malta archaeology this common orientation towards archaeological heritage management is of course related to the areas of competencies and interest of the contributors themselves but even more so to the fact that it is at present at the archaeological forefront of the current economic crisis building on national legislations that have been reinforced over the past 20 years ­ themselves based on the council of europe s 1992 `malta or `valletta european convention for the protection of archaeological heritage see http www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage archeologie/default_en.asp as well as the icahm ­ icomos 1990 charter for the protection and management of the archaeological heritage http www.icomos org/icahm/documents/charter.html ­ archaeological heritage management has been a continuously growing sector in terms of economic activity employment and productivity ­ one that risks now feeling the full force of the crisis it is also a sector that captures some of the social and political choices surrounding our attitudes to our heritage and to the past as jean-paul demoule indicates in his opening paper and as nathan schlanger re-examines in the postscript two additional comments to conclude this introduction first it might be pertinent to reiterate here the usual disclaimers rather than obtain formal authorised statements our aim here has been to gain a sense qualitative or quantitative of

[close]

p. 12

12 archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions the stakes and the problems areas raised by the crisis all the contributors to this volume whether they come from academia the commercial sector or state bodies are certainly knowledgeable about the situation prevailing in their countries but they do not pretend and nor are they expected to present anything like an official sectorial or national viewpoint next as we noted at the onset this volume represents something of a first but it may well not be a one-off provided that sufficient interest and goodwill can be found we envisage the publication ­ perhaps in a year s time for the next eaa meeting in september 2011 ­ of a second volume in which information will be updated and commented on and of course new countries sectors and impact areas represented and analysed please do contact the editors if you are interested in contributing to this publication and its aims.

[close]

p. 13

archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions edited by nathan schlanger kenneth aitchison 2010 ace culture lab editions 13 2 the crisis ­ economic ideological and archaeological jean-paul demoule ufr histoire de l art et archéologie université de paris 1 panthéon-sorbonne jean-paul.demoule@univ-paris1.fr 1 introduction since its creation more than a decade ago the european association of archaeologists eaa has served as a useful forum for debating different understandings of the organisation of archaeological heritage management across europe this has been one of the tasks taken on by the eaa sponsored committee on archaeological legislation and organisation in europe and this is also one of the goals of the ec funded ace project archaeology in contemporary europe this eaa session and the publication that ensues is therefore highly appropriate for raising and summing up some of the broad issues economic ideological and archaeological brought to the fore by the current global crisis 2 two world views broadly speaking there are in western philosophy two contrasting concepts of society in the anglo-saxon `common law tradition society regulates itself either following the optimistic version of adam smith through the operations of a hidden hand or in the more pessimistic versions of neo-darwinism sociobiology and economic liberalism in general by means of the `struggle for life for the american economist nobel prize winner milton friedman for example the state in not the solution but the problem this principle seems to have been abandoned in a matter of hours at the beginning of the recent economic crisis in october 2008 for the other tradition mainly in continental europe it is the state in its role as the expression of the community of citizens which organises and regulates social life up until the 1980 s in many parts of western europe most of what concerned the general interest ­ such as education a large part of culture as well as transports energy post and telecommunications and indeed banks and insurance companies ­ were the responsibility and the property of the state that is to say of the community of citizens it was only during the 1980s that this state of affairs was put in question essentially for reasons of ideology rather than economic inefficiency and without a real public debate as for archaeology in the second model it is the nation state that takes charge of the protection of archaeological heritage either through a state archaeological service or through dedicated public bodies in the first model archaeological heritage is treated as merchandise or a service commercial archaeological companies are at the service of their clients the developers with only the postulation of some `code of ethics to ensure quality control within the overall framework of the free market economy it should be noted that the term of `developer-led archaeology as sometimes used in anglo-saxon countries and in translations into english is

[close]

p. 14

14 archaeology and the global economic crisis multiple impacts possible solutions in this respect misleading in reality it is not the developers who originated the protective measures such as preventive or rescue archaeology but rather it is the community of citizens as expressed through the state its laws regulations and policy guidances it is the state which decrees that archaeological remains need to be studied prior to their destruction the seemingly innocent term of `developerled in this sense reveals wider conceptions of heritage management it should be remarked that there has never been anything in the nature of a public debate or consultation within the european union regarding these two different economic and political approaches for instance it is possible to imagine and bring into being a common european public service is such fields as railways postal services or electricity provision ­ just as there now moves towards common european airspace or more topically a common banking supervisory mechanism such an approach was never really considered in almost every field of economic and social life the option of a generalised commercial competition was the one taken as if as a matter of course the advantages of such generalised commercial competition as claimed by the likes of adam smith and milton friedman were supposed to result in lower prices and better quality on the premise that people will choose to buy the best products at the lowest prices this has not really been the case for several reasons 3 half a dozen reasons for questioning the benefits of economic competition ­ first as shown by the nobel prize winner for economics stieglitz the hidden hand of the market would work only if people had complete information regarding merchandises and services but it is never the case people often chose the degree of information they feel they need and they can also very easily be manipulated regarding the information they have access to ­ second supposedly competing companies often engage in agreements of various sorts verging on illegality such deals between mobile phone operators or between roads and infrastructure companies have recently occurred in france for example ­ third commercial companies and their shareholders prefer immediate concrete benefits to long-term investments ­ as can be seen with privatised railway companies ­ forth regarding archaeology the notion of competition is often seriously misunderstood it so happens that developers do not set out to buy the best possible archaeology that is the most securely dated and documented interpretation of say early bronze age occupation in a given region of northern italy as could be provided by the best archaeological operator developers simply want following the regulations in force their grounds to be cleared of archaeological remains as quickly and cheaply as possible economic competition in the field of archaeology has therefore nothing to do with scientific competition it is simply an incitement to excavate for the lowest possible costs as unfortunately can be observed every day scientific research is of course also subject to various calls and grants many of them highly selective and competitive emanating from national and international bodies but the criteria for choosing between competing proposals have little if nothing to do with the lowest possible costs and much with the research project proposed by the biding departments or laboratories and their record of excellence and delivery private sector research does of course exist but

[close]

p. 15

the crisis ­ economic ideological and archaeological 1 it thrives mainly in economically rewarding domains such as medicine weapons food transport where quality can be directly controlled and enforced and where research has mostly applied rather than fundamental objectives ­ fifth the `code of ethics is a noble notion that may be relevant or applicable in some possibly protestant countries of western europe but is it not pertinent to be realistic in many parts of our continent and in much of the world such a code supposes in fact a shared commitment to strong scientific control which does not seem to be the case for example with the first attempts at introducing commercial archaeology in france ­ sixth as a final point to return to our preoccupations with the current global economic crisis it is clear that the effects of such a crisis on commercial companies in any economic or cultural field are quite different and more challenging than is the case with public bodies operating under the guarantee of the state 4 a case study the introduction of commercial companies to french archaeology as we all know and as we can further appreciate from the analyses and details provided throughout this volume the effects of the current economic crisis on archaeology are serious indeed many colleagues in private companies have lost their jobs and there is also a risk that much scientific data and documentation will definitely disappear ­ just like the professional expertise generated over the years we have of course to express our feelings of solidarity with these jobless colleagues i would like now to take up as a test case the example of france where commercial archaeology was introduced only in 2003 see also schlanger salas rossenbach this volume over the years france had accumulated serious delays in matters of archaeological heritage protection one of the reasons was that for long archaeology did not play much of a role in the construction of national identity the country s `noble ancestors were rather the greeks and the romans and the louvre with all its rich holdings in these domains contains almost no finds recovered from the french soil it was only in 2001 some time after the malta convention was ratified that the parliament passed a law which installed the `polluter pays principle and which created a national research institute in charge of preventive archaeology inrap which took charge of evaluations and preventive excavations across the country in collaboration with the universities the cnrs the ministry of culture and the archaeological services of various towns and counties for my part i have participated in the drafting of the law and i served as inrap s first president from 2002 to 2008 see demoule 2002 demoule landes 2009 the sudden generalised application after 2001 of the `polluter pays principle to all development projects across france led to numerous reactions especially in regions where preventive archaeology had hitherto been poorly practiced these reactions coincided with the arrival of a new conservative majority in power resentment against preventive archaeology in general focussed on the 2001 law and the parliamentary majority decided in 2003 among other amendments to the law to open archaeology to commercial competition presumably made under the expectation that excavations costs would be reduced this decision was clearly ideological in its motivations it certainly had no scientific justification the scientific community as one vigorously protested this decision through demonstrations petitions newspaper articles and so forth.

[close]