Enabling the futureby managing the past

015

ISO 9001Registered

QualityManagement

Foundations Archaeology was founded in 1995 as one of the new independent contractarchaeology units which came into being after the introduction of Planning PolicyGuidance note 16 in 1991. The new legislation opened up the market for independentunits to work alongside, and often replace the former system of Museum and CountyCouncil based units.

A successful 2 years saw the incorporation of the business as ArchaeologicalManagement Services Ltd in 1997, although the company continues to trade asFoundations Archaeology.

Pipeline or road scheme, house extension or historic building conversion, no job is toobig or too small for our dedicated and highly skilled team of heritage specialists. Overthe last 20 years, Foundations has gone from strength to strength and now has anationwide reputation for consistent rapid, high-quality and cost-effective work.

We offer a comprehensive and professional nationwide service, providing commerciallyaware support where and when our clients need it.

About us

2

We are committed to the highest level of quality standards and have been certified toBS/EN/ISO 9001:2008 for quality assurance in the provision of archaeological servicessince 2003 – establishing ourselves as one of the first archaeological practices to beindependently certified for quality standards.

Foundations is also a Registered Organisation with the Chartered Institute forArchaeologists (CIfA) and prides itself on working to the Institute’s Standards andGuidance, as well as complying with its Codes of Conduct and Practice.

Furthering our commitment to high standards and excellence in quality, Foundationsis also operating under SSIP (Safety Schemes in Procurement) certification and CHAS(the Contractors Health and Safety Assessment Scheme) accreditation.

Accreditations

3

ServicesFoundations offers a wide range of archaeological services.Here is a brief description of what we offer.

DESK-BASED ASSESSMENTSA desk-based assessment involves the study and analysis of existing data sources for a site and itsimmediate environs, including written, graphic, photographic and electronic information.

The purpose of the assessment is to consider the character of the study area, the likelihood that heritageassets may be present, their significance and setting, and the potential impact of any development.

CONSULTANCYWe offer professional, high quality advice on projects affecting historic assets which is of paramountimportance at many stages during the development process.

Foundations has over 70 years joint experience in the provision of heritage advice, guidance, riskmanagement and recommendations.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTCertain projects are required by law to have an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken toassess the possible positive or negative impacts that a proposed project may have on the natural, historic,social and economic environment.

The product of an EIA is an Environmental Statement, which will assess each individual environmentalaspect by chapter. Foundations has considerable experience in preparation of Cultural Heritage Chaptersto form part of an Environmental Statement.

EVALUATIONAn archaeological evaluation consists of non-intrusive and/or intrusive fieldwork which determines thepresence or absence of archaeological deposits, features, structures or finds within a targeted area.Where archaeological remains are identified, the evaluation endeavours to define their character, extent,quality and preservation in order to allow an assessment of their value.

At the end of the works a suitable report and archive will be produced.

4

EXCAVATIONAn archaeological excavation comprises the open area excavation of a defined area or ‘site’. The projectwill have clear research objectives and will investigate, record and interpret any archaeological deposits,features and structures present, and retrieves any artifacts, ecofacts or other remains.

The project will include detailed post-excavation proposals resulting in the analysis of the results andappropriate publication in an academic journal or other vehicle.

HISTORIC BUILDING RECORDINGThe recording of historic buildings that are to be affected by redevelopment or are under threat from othercauses is a growing field within the heritage industry. The recording will act to establish the character,history, dating, form and development of a specific building, structure, or complex and its setting (CIfA 2011).

Foundations has extensive experience in undertaking such surveys at all levels as set out in CIfA andEnglish Heritage Guidance (2006); from basic Level 1 and photographic surveys, through to more complexLevel 3 and 4 surveys.

PUBLIC OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONFoundations Archaeology has a strong policy on outreach and community involvement through provision ofinformation through a variety of media, including talks at local societies, school and community visits andinformation boards.

We also take a number of work placements each year from local schools and from universities across the country.

FIELDWALKINGFieldwalking, or surface artefact collection, is a form of archaeological evaluation. The process is onlygenerally suitable for arable, preferably recently ploughed and unsown fields and involves the systematiccollection of artefacts and ecofacts visible in the topsoil, usually either by line walking linear transects orgrid walking defined squares.

The resulting finds are analysed and distribution plans prepared by archaeological period to help defineareas of potential.

WATCHING BRIEFAn archaeological watching brief comprises a defined programme of observation and investigationconducted during any non-archaeological groundworks or other activity on a site where the possibilityexists that archaeological deposits may be disturbed or destroyed.

5

Rarely a week goes by without national mediareports of another important archaeologicaldiscovery somewhere in Britain. In recent months,we have seen huge worldwide interest in thediscovery by archaeologists working in Leicesterof the body of Richard III, and finds like theStaffordshire Hoard are attractive to the mediabecause of the public interest and enthusiasm forour history and heritage, both at home and abroad.

In recent years, TV programmes like ‘Time Team’and ‘Meet the Ancestors’ have helped to popularisearchaeology, and, as a result, far more peoplehave a broad understanding of the work ofarchaeologists, and the ways in which anyonecan get involved in archaeological research. Westill have so much to learn about the lives of ourancestors, and archaeology is a quest forknowledge to which everyone can contribute.

What is less well known to the general public isthe vital role that expert archaeology advisorssupporting local government planners play in thisquest for knowledge. Whilst many nationallyimportant archaeological sites in the UK areprotected by law as ‘Scheduled Ancient Monuments’and ‘Listed Buildings’, the vast majority of ourarchaeological sites are only protected throughthe planning system. When a new developmentis proposed, at whatever scale, it is crucial thatplanning authorities are well advised byarchaeologists, otherwise sites and crucialevidence can be lost forever to the bulldozer.

This is not just in the public interest, but it is alsostrongly in the interests of the developers too.The last thing that any developer wants, particularlyat a time when profit margins are reduced, isunexpected costs and delays. It is therefore ineveryone’s interests that archaeological work iscommissioned in advance of the development,

funded by the developer under the ‘polluter pays’principle. This allows any important archaeologicalevidence to be recovered in an appropriate manner,without any cost to the public, and ensures thatrisks are significantly reduced for developers.

Historic Environment Records (HERs)The bedrock of any archaeology service advisingplanners is the HER, which should be acomprehensive, accessible and authoritativedatabase of the historic environment of the area.This is not just a tool to inform planning anddecision-making, but it is also a resource forcommunities engaged in neighbourhoodplanning, as well as providing information forthe management and understanding of thearchaeological heritage. It is a dynamic resourcethat needs to be continuously managed andupdated to reflect new discoveries, investigations,interpretations and changes in understanding.Across England, there are over 1.5 millionarchaeological sites recorded in 87 HERs, withnewly discovered sites being added at a rate of2-5% per year. Some 75% of the HERs areaccessible online, many via the Heritage Gateway.1

Expert adviceHERs are managed and developed byarchaeologists, who form part of the serviceavailable to local authority planning services.These expert advisors not only comment onindividual planning applications, but also givestrategic advice on development and local plansto ensure that national planning guidance isinterpreted correctly to sustain and enhance thesignificance and setting of local heritage ‘assets’.This can include triggering and potentiallyreviewing environmental impact assessments,or managing the archaeological implications ofmajor infrastructure development.

Archaeologists work closely with developers andtheir agents to ensure that planned developmentcan go ahead. It is rarely a block on developmentand only about 3% of the planning applicationsput forward each year require some form ofarchaeological response. Currently, this meansabout 5-6,000 archaeological projects are

Digging in the right directionDr Mike Heyworth, Director of theCouncil for British Archaeology,details the vital contribution ofexpert archaeological advice toguide planning authorities…

6

Planning advice

undertaken nationally across England (with moreundertaken across the UK through similarapproaches in Scotland, Wales and NorthernIreland). This work is funded by developers andmakes an important on-going contribution topublic understanding and appreciation of thepast. It is very rare indeed for planning applicationsto be refused due in any way to archaeology,with less than 150 applications per year beingimpacted in this way (out of over 400,000applications currently decided each year).

Potential impact of funding reductionsIt is clear that for a very modest public investmentin expert archaeological advice given to planningauthorities, not only is there enormous publicbenefit delivered through gains in the understandingof our archaeological heritage, but this is principallydelivered by bringing in private funding for thearchaeological work.

This investment and private funding, as well asthe archaeological knowledge and the publicbenefit that it delivers, is all put at risk if cutbacksin public sector funding impact on the level of theexpert advice that local authorities need. Since2008, there has already been an 18% fall instaffing numbers within local authority archaeologyservices – from 400 to 330 – and the rate ofdecrease continues.

There are dangers that if this decline continues,and if we start to see large numbers of planningapplications agreed without any provision forpotential archaeological investigation or otherprotection measures, we could lose forever uniqueassets, irreplaceable information about our past,and the opportunities to use the distinctive localhistoric environment of an area to create andenhance special places.

In this type of scenario, there are also major risksboth for planning authorities and developers.These include risks that developments go aheadthat may be unsustainable in terms of nationalplanning policy and are thereby damaging to thereputation of planning authorities. They alsoinclude risks that developers are inadvertently

exposed to delays and extra costs if importantarchaeological remains are found during thecourse of construction work – especially if theseinclude human remains or nationally importantarchaeological sites.

Protecting heritage protectionThe concerns of the archaeological sector wouldbe reduced if there was a statutory requirementfor all local authorities to have access to a HERservice, supported by expert staff that is:• Accessible to the public;

• Kept up to date and maintained to an appropriatestandard as determined by the government;

• Covers all elements of the historic environment,whether visible, buried or submerged;

• Is sufficient to enable plan-making anddevelopment decisions to be undertaken in away that takes informed due account of thehistoric environment.

In the meantime, we need government to giveclear guidance on its expectations of localplanning authorities in the implementation of theNational Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

It is only through a continuation of the key role ofexpert archaeological advice to planningauthorities that we can ensure the public interestin our archaeological heritage is supported andenhanced. Without this advice, we will seedamage and destruction of archaeologicalremains, which is in no-one’s interest.

1 www.heritagegateway.org.uk

Dr Mike Heyworth MBEDirectorCouncil for British ArchaeologyTel: +44 (0)1904 671417www.archaeologyuk.org

7

Planning advice

A Desk-based Assessment (DBA) is usually thefirst formal opportunity for organisations proposingchanges in use or management of land or buildingsto benefit from professional heritage advice.Because of this ‘early stage’ involvement, this canbe very important in terms of initial advice.

An initial point to make, without being facetious, isthat archaeology, whether of landscapes or buildingsis all about the unknown and the unexpected. Theexcitement on Time Team programmes comesfrom the discovery – in professional life this is acarefully managed process, but the essential pointremains that surprise discoveries are not uncommon.Finding archaeology at the desk-based stage maynot always be welcome, but finding archaeologylater in the design and construction process getsincreasingly expensive and difficult to manage. Sothe key is to get it ‘right’ at the outset.

Getting the right adviceThere are 2 elements to ‘getting it right’ consistingfirst of getting appropriate professional advice,and second, of getting advice and reportsundertaken to the appropriate standards andtailored to a specific development proposal.

Appropriate professional advice can usually besummarised by making sure your advisor is aprofessional – and that means a member of theUK’s Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA),or an equivalent professional institute (there areonly a few elsewhere around the world).

CIfA membership – look for either full Membersor Associates (MCIfA or ACIfA as post-nominals)means that the individual has been validated,

signed up to a code of conduct, undertakescontinuing professional development and agreedto work in accordance with appropriate standards.Alternatively, look for advice from an organisationthat is a CIfA Registered Organisation – where aMCIfA is responsible and the entire organisationadheres to the same professional standards.CIfA is the archaeological equivalent of theRoyal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) forarchitects, Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) forengineers or Royal Institute of CharteredSurveyors (RICS) for surveyors.

Secondly, ensure the work is done to theappropriate standard, in this case the CIfA’sStandard and Guidance for historic environmentDesk-based Assessment 2012 revision.(http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/node-files/DBA2012-Working-draft.pdf. Thissets out the expected sources of information thatshould normally be consulted, and the analysis ofthose sources, leading to the types of conclusionsand recommendations that would normally arise.Be prepared to discuss expectations and riskswith a MCIfA/RO at the outset, and expect clearadvice before commissioning a DBA on what isgoing to be done and why. Not every source ofinformation will be applicable in everydevelopment proposal, but to not consult somesources for reasons of time or cost, introducesincreased risks that will need to be documentedand taken into consideration in decisionsthroughout the design and application process.

The HER and DBAThe single most important source of informationwill be the Historic Environment Record (HER)which all planning authorities are required to haveaccess to. However, after the cut-backs in recentyears to local authority funding, not all authoritieswill have an HER in-house, nor will all haveaccess to heritage professionals to maintain anHER. In addition, getting information out of an HERcan sometimes be both costly and sometimestime-consuming (for small projects or enquiries

Desk-based Assessments and Pre-Planning ArchaeologyDr Gerry Wait, Director at NexusHeritage provides an overview ofDesk-based Assessments and their importance in early-stageheritage advice…

8

Desk-based assessment and field survey

early in the planning process). Early contactshould be made with the local planning authority’sarchaeological adviser in order to agree the brieffor the DBA, and ensure that it will meet the localplanning authority requirements. However, somelocal authorities no longer have archaeologicalofficers, or where officers are still in place theymay no longer have the scope to offer advice,which makes the importance of the professionalundertaking a DBA and his/her reporting all themore important.

The process of analysis leading to conclusionsand recommendations is often an iterative processas well, and should be undertaken with specificreference to both the heritage information about asite and the emerging development scheme. Ageneric desk-based assessment would be unlikelyto be considered ‘professional’ – but there isnonetheless a continuum along which detail andspecificity can range. The key to managing thisissue rests in the concept of the significance ofthe known or potential heritage remains – moresignificant remains are likely to mean greaterrisks of costs and management down the line –and managing responses and costs begins withgetting better information from the outset.

The standard briefly summarised is to determine,as far as is reasonably possible from existingrecords, the nature, extent and significance ofthe historic environment within a specified area.DBA will be undertaken using appropriatemethods and practices which satisfy the statedaims of the project, and which comply with theCode of conduct, Code of approved practice forthe regulation of contractual arrangements in fieldarchaeology, and other relevant by-laws of theCIfA. In a development context, DBA will establishthe impact of the proposed development on thesignificance of the historic environment (or willidentify the need for further evaluation to do so),and will enable reasoned proposals and decisionsto be made whether to mitigate, offset or acceptwithout further intervention that impact.

The purpose of a DBA according to the guidanceis to: • Gain an understanding of known assets and the

potential for heritage assets to survive within thearea of study;

• Of the significance of any such assetsconsidering their archaeological, historic,architectural and artistic interests;

• Assess the impact of proposed development orother land use changes on the significance of theheritage assets and their settings;

• Outline strategies for further evaluation whetheror not intrusive, where the nature, extent orsignificance of the resource is not sufficientlywell defined and/or develop design strategies toensure new development makes a positivecontribution to the character and localdistinctiveness of the historic environment andlocal place-shaping;

• Proposals for further archaeological investigationwithin a programme of research, whetherundertaken in response to a threat or not.

Research and experienceResearch and interpretation are terms that weneed to consider in more detail. And this linksback to my initial point about archaeology anddiscovery. Research and the organisation of datamay seem a basic skill, but not all archaeologistshave the same or appropriate expertise inconducting research, because research methods,sources, and analysis need to be linked to thelikely subject matter on a site.

Even more important is having the appropriateexperience and expertise to interpret the results ofresearch. What this really means is being able torecognise and understand the clues that indicateeither that known heritage remains may besignificant, or that there is a heightened potentialfor significant remains to present. Good research

9

Desk-based assessment and field survey

can be undone by inadequate expertise ininterpretation. A good professional will advisewhen they do not have the appropriate expertisecalled for in a particular set of circumstances, butthe savvy client commissioning a DBA will assurethemselves that their consultant is suitably skilled.Having the appropriate expertise means that theclient gets the best advice based on the bestinformation at each stage in a process, so thatdiscoveries come as a positive opportunity not asan unwelcome alarm.

DBA contentsA DBA report will normally contain, as a minimum:• A non-technical summary;

• A clear map of study area;

• A list of the data sources used;

• A succinct disposition of aims and purpose andmethodology employed;

• Clearly identify the heritage assets andarchaeological potential of the study area;

• Assess the interest and significance of eachasset and its setting, focussing on those aspectswhich will be affected by any proposed orpredicted changes;

• Assess the nature of the effects and options forreducing or mitigating harm;

• A description of the area’s historic character andthe effect of proposed development upon it(where appropriate, this should include optionsfor conserving or enhancing local character);

• Conclusions, including a confidence rating andthe extent to which the aims and purpose havebeen met and references;

• Supporting illustrations at appropriate scales,along with supporting data (sometimestabulated), may be provided in appendices.

The change from the old Planning PolicyGuidance Notes 15 and 16 to PPS5, to the NPPFhas marked several important shifts. First, thecompression of concepts from several hundredpages in the PPGs down to 4-5 pages in theNPPF means that the arguments can appearcryptic and the language coded, so againadvice from a MCIfA/RO and a planningconsultant (a member of RTPI) is good practice.

Second, the issue of the setting of heritageremains has emerged as an important planningconsideration – so assets (buildings or sites)located off-site can still be affected by changes inland use or development. This ought to beconsidered, even if briefly, at DBA stage.

Third, and of possibly greater importance is theshift towards seeking benefits to both developersand local communities from the process ofmanaging impacts to heritage assets. Thelanguage used to be all about minimising impactsand managing risk – and these remain important.However, that is not the end of the matter, anddevelopers can expect to have some benefitsderive to them from the heritage work they haveto undertake through the planning process.Likewise, developers ought to expect that localcommunities should also benefit from the works –

10

Desk-based assessment and field survey

which can take many forms including communityengagement in investigations, open days,exhibitions, accessible publications and so on.

Commissioning a good DBA and getting goodprofessional advice sets the appropriatefoundations for this process and for a wide rangeof further investigations and activities that alllead towards the final benefits. But as the oldadage has it: If you don’t know where you aregoing then you probably won’t get there.

Desk-based assessments are almost always donein support of either outline or detailed planningapplications – they are essentially pre-planningworks. We now need to consider 2 forms ofarchaeological research/investigation that moveus into a grey area. This reveals a great diversityin the application of the seemingly simple heritagepolicies in NPPF. Local authorities and theirarchaeological advisors are notably diverse inwhat they expect in desk-based assessments,and this diversity grows ever greater when thenext 2 ‘logical’ steps in the archaeological processare concerned – aerial photographs andgeophysical surveys.

Aerial Photographs – the next stageAerial Photographs (APs) have been an importantarchaeological tool for nearly a century. Thepopular TV programme ‘Time Team’ has revealedAP analysis to the public – the principle being thatburied archaeological remains may affect cropgrowth or soil colours. The patterns of stuntedplants in spring fields or green plants in a fieldturning golden in august all may reveal buriedremains. Not all types of archaeology affect cropgrowth, and not all years are equally good atrevealing these effects, so the technique is not apanacea, and the absence of crop-marks does notmean an absence of archaeological remains. Inparticular, crop-marks work best in revealingrelatively shallow buried archaeological sites, andmore deeply buried sites (e.g. where rivers floodand silt their floodplains, or at the base of steephills) are unlikely to be visible. However, the toolremains an important one to the archaeologist.

Many archaeologists have basic skills inrecognising crop-marks from aerial photographs,

and where this technique may be important, thendeveloper-clients or consulting archaeologistswill turn to archaeologists specialising in thetechnique. The results of many previous aerialsurveys have now been incorporated into manyHERs through a national enhancement project,the National Mapping Programme, funded byEnglish Heritage.

The ‘geophys’If ‘Time Team’ has explained aerial photographs,this is nothing compared to the mystique of, andreliance placed upon geophysical surveys – ‘thegeophys’. The principles behind geophysics areeven more abstrusely scientific than for aerialphotographs, but at the simplest level, theoperative principle is that the presence ofarchaeological remains will affect how eitherminute changes in magnetic pulses or electricalresistance is conducted through the soil. Thesame limitations apply to geophysics as to APs –deeply buried sites (generally over 6-700mmbelow the surface) are in general harder todetect, and local geology and even weather (likeprolonged heavy rain) can affect results andinterpretation. Ground penetrating radar usesradar to ‘see’ more deeply into the ground or tosee small faults in masonry structures andbuildings, but is much slower and therefore moreexpensive to implement. Just as with APs, manyarchaeologists can ‘read’ many geophysical‘plots’ and may even have had experience inusing the survey technology, but again geophysicsis something best undertaken and interpreted bysuitably skilled professionals.

Dr Gerry WaitDirectorNexus Heritage and former Chairman CharteredInstitute for Archaeologists, Chair of theRegistration Committee (Organisations) for theCIfA and current Co-Chair of the Committee onProfessional Associations in Archaeology for theEuropean Association of ArchaeologistsTel: 0151 326 2247gerry.wait@nexus-heritage.comwww.nexus-heritage.com

11

Desk-based assessment and field survey

Following on from the field survey stage istypically ‘evaluation’, termed by archaeologists inthe sense that the work is intended to ‘evaluate’the archaeology. This stage reveals possibly thegreatest diversity of approach by archaeologists,including local planning authorities (LPA) and theorganisations (often referred to by archaeologistsas ‘contractors’) – and this is tied to slightlydiffering concepts of the purposes.

A decade ago, under PPGs 15 and 16, thepurpose of an evaluation was to provide a LPA

with information about the presence, characterand importance of heritage, and to enable theauthority to make an informed planning decision.In essence under NPPF this remains unchanged,albeit not so clearly expressed. Practice hasevolved and in essence the test is more likely tobe a ‘yes-no’ one: are there heritage remainspresent of such importance? Or are impactsarising from a proposed development of suchmagnitude upon such remains as to justify aplanning refusal?

Some authorities, perhaps a majority, see the‘evaluation’ as a means of answering the firstpart of the question, while others take the positionthat if a Desk Based Assessment (DBA) (plusperhaps APs and/or geophysics) does not revealthe presence or a high probability of verysignificant remains, a refusal is unlikely to be

Evaluating the archaeologyDr Gerry Wait, Director at NexusHeritage considers what ‘evaluation’means for archaeologists andplanners alike…

1 2

Evaluation

justifiable. Therefore, an evaluation becomes atool for deciding in detail how to manage theimpact to archaeology – and can be left to post-determination.

The CIfA’s Standard and Guidance forArchaeological Field Evaluation (Nov 2013revision)1 defines an evaluation as: ‘a limitedprogramme of non-intrusive and/or intrusivefieldwork which determines the presence orabsence of archaeological features, structures,deposits, artefacts or ecofacts within a specifiedarea or site on land, inter-tidal zone or underwater.If such archaeological remains are present, fieldevaluation defines their character, extent, qualityand preservation, and enables an assessment oftheir worth in a local, regional, national orinternational context as appropriate.’

The Standard and Guidance states that thepurpose of an evaluation is to: ‘determine, as faras is reasonably possible, the nature of thearchaeological resource within a specified areausing appropriate methods and practises. Thesewill satisfy the stated aims on the project, andcomply with the Code of Conduct, Code ofApproved Practise for the regulation of contractualarrangements in archaeology, and other relevantby-laws of the CIfA.’

As the evaluation process moves from desk-based study to on-site work (geophysical survey,trenching or test pitting), the dialogue with thelocal authority archaeological adviser becomeseven more important, to ensure that the workproposed is fit for purpose and that all of therelevant information will have been supplied tothe planning authority before a decision is madeon the development proposed.

In archaeological parlance most field work isundertaken by a relatively small number ofgenerally larger organisations. This emphasisesthat this type of work requires a range ofarchaeological and aligned skills, and that thiscan really only effectively be deployed by largerorganisations. The earlier stages in thisarchaeological process can, and often are,

provided by sole-traders or small specialistorganisations (often called consultants withinthe discipline), but field evaluations require adiversity of skills, and a level of corporateinfrastructure, such that small organisations find itdifficult to be effective.

Evaluations are most commonly undertaken bythe excavation of trial trenches or test-pits, initiallyusing a mechanical excavator to remove turf andtopsoil, and thereafter by hand excavation byarchaeologists. Trenches are often about 2 metresin width (depending on the mechanical excavator)and may vary in length from 10 to 50 metres.Test pits are even more variable – 1x1 metres,1x2 metres, even 5x5 metre dimensions arecommonly deployed depending upon siteconditions and the nature of the archaeologicalremains anticipated. Normally detailed handexcavation will be limited to what is necessary toproduce the information to enable informedplanning decisions, but many LPAs interpret thisdifferently, seeing an evaluation like any otherarchaeological excavation, and thus requiremore and more detailed excavation, recording,and subsequent analyses.

This reminds us that archaeology is not a onesize fits all standardised technique, and that thereis inevitably considerable scope for professionaljudgement, and the careful developer will availhim/herself of appropriate expert advisors. Thearchaeologist who did the DBA may still beinvolved, perhaps over-seeing the process andproviding continuity of advice, but will have beenjoined by a team of other archaeologicalprofessionals from one or many differentorganisations each with their own specialistcontributions to make. As the diversity of worksand techniques increases (and as costs inevitablyrise) the need for expert coordination andinterpretation becomes ever more important.

Evaluation marks an important change from thepreceding stages – now there are artefacts, siterecords, photographs – all the components thatarchaeologists call ‘an archive’. Archaeologicalexcavation is a professionally undertaken

13

Evaluation

disturbance or even a controlled and partialdestruction of parts of an archaeological site orasset, and what remains of the part disturbed arethe records and the artefacts. There is thereforean ethical imperative on the part of the archaeologistto analyse and interpret the results, and then to‘curate’ the archive for the benefit of otherresearchers and archaeologists so that theinformation should not be lost. Field evaluationsare therefore likely to be relatively costly exercises,and the work of analysing, interpreting, archivingand publishing the results, while not always veryvisible, may nonetheless be significant.

The link between the cost of field evaluations andthe ‘reasonableness’ of local planning authorityrequirements throughout the planning process, isapparent and remains hotly debated.

There may be many outcomes of the evaluationprocess. First, and in some ways primary, is theprovision of information for the planning process,and the results of the evaluation will form part ofthe suite of information that the local planningauthority’s archaeological adviser will use toprovide advice on the planning application to thePlanning Committee or officer that makes thedecision. An archaeological report on this type ofwork often remains as ‘grey literature’ that is alimited print run report deposited in the authorities’Historic Environment Record, perhaps in localmuseums or record offices, and increasingly inon-line web-based report archive systems 2.

However, Time Team again reminds us of theinterest by the general public in the history of theplaces where they live, and thus the importance

14

Evaluation

of designing archaeological works to do morethan tick a box in a set of planning requirements.Post-Time Team local community groups are stillinterested in visiting and seeing, or even betterparticipating in, and at the very least visitingexhibitions and reading about local ‘digs’. Thosecommissioning archaeological field evaluations maywell want to see that their financial investmentsprovide benefits to both the development sponsorsand to local community groups.

The mention of the costs of undertaking archaeologyraises two important benefits of professionalisationthat arise in the event of things going wrong.First, both Members and Registered Organisationsof the CIfA will carry appropriate insurances,although careful clients will want to ensure thedetailed coverage is appropriate. Secondly, in theevent of serious disputes, all MCIfA’s and RO’sare committed to the CIfA’s Code of Conduct, andare therefore subject to disciplinary action where aclient or member of the public considers thatunprofessional work or advice has been given.

1 http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/node-files/IfASG-Field-Evaluation.pdf

2 http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/greylit/ orhttp://www.oasis.ac.uk/).

Dr Gerry WaitDirectorNexus Heritage and former Chairman CharteredInstitute for Archaeologists, Chair of theRegistration Committee (Organisations) for theCIfA and current Co-Chair of the Committee onProfessional Associations in Archaeology for theEuropean Association of ArchaeologistsTel: 0151 326 2247gerry.wait@nexus-heritage.comwww.nexus-heritage.com

1 5

Evaluation

Foundations Archaeology 1, The Shaftesbury Centre, Percy Street, Swindon, SN2 2AZTel: 01793 525993 Email: admin@foundations.co.uk Web: www.foundations.co.uk Twitter: @FoundationsArch