+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology (/showthread.php?tid=829)
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - Moby - 16th February 2008
Hi all,
Been a long time since I have contributed but I thought I would see what everyone's views are on an issue that has been troubling me...
I have noticed that certain areas of the UK have curators that appear to be closely associated with contracting units (for example Hull, Norfolk, and parts of Lincolnshire).
Although the two should be mutually exclusive (otherwise it would be like your dad marking your GCSE exam for you for example! :face-confused
, I noticed that a response by a curator to a developer detailing the work they would require also included a Written Scheme of Investigation by their associated contracting unit. This somewhat flies in the face of commercialisation surely, and is basically a method to maintain a monopoly of the commercial archaeological works within that county.
I am not surely of the illegality of such methods (will have to gen up on barriers to trade and all that), but I was wondering what other archaeologists' views were.
Cheers,
Moby
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - Moby - 16th February 2008
Oops, have to apologise with regard to saying the WSI was sent to the developer by the curator - having looked into it further I realise the WSI was sent to the council planners NOT the developer.
However, my overall concern over curator and contractor relationships remains the same. I have seen lists of units that have undertaken work within a county sent to developers by a curator with their associated unit written in bold and a larger font than any of the other units to make them stand out.
Sorry, for the mistake, but am still intereted in people's views on conflicts of interest in commercial archaeology!
Moby
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - trowelfodder - 16th February 2008
I feel the same way about the planning system in Wales with all the Welsh trusts having commercial units (in all cases bar one these units are in the same offices). They then essentialy moniter thier own work - hardly an impartial or fair system!!
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - drpeterwardle - 16th February 2008
Have to say it is not that much of a bother these days. It was once but not any more.
Peter
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - voice of reason - 16th February 2008
Don't know where you work Dr P, but in the gritty world of fieldwork it is still a real problem in many places we go across England. Almost impossible to determine or demonstrate full extent as it mostly goes on behind closed doors. Often there is also unconscious (being charitable) behaviour by some curators in making life as difficult as possible for 'outsiders'. Local jobs for local people, as the League of Gentlemen might put it.
Wales is indeed a strange case - not only the close-knit set-up but add to that I have never seen a tender for any fieldwork (eg on properties in care)or provision of any kind of survey work from Cadw. Has any one else on the list any experience of being asked to quote for such work?
I keep meaning to look at Government best practice procurement and EU law but then something more interesting comes along.
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - BAJR Host - 16th February 2008
interesting thread.. with relevance to the Geographic areas of competance.
Interestingly there is this page.
http://www.cambria.org.uk/services/dc/contract.htm
and this
Quote:quote:Curatorial staff of each of the Welsh Archaeological Trusts are recognised members of the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers. Funding for the curatorial work of the Trusts is provided by Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments, the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales and local planning authorities.
Code of Practice
1. Curating and contracting functions will be carried out independently by separately staffed sections within each organisation.
2. The curatorial staff of each Trust will provide impartial, professional advice on the archaeological implications of proposed developments.
3. The curatorial staff of each Trust will normally provide a brief for archaeological assessments, field evaluations and investigations, as appropriate.
4. The curatorial staff of each Trust will be responsible for approving the detailed specifications designed to satisfy an archaeological brief.
5. The curatorial staff of each Trust will advise those inviting tenders for archaeological work arising from an archaeological brief of their freedom of choice in the selection of an archaeological contractor.
6. The curatorial staff of each Trust recognise that those intending to commission such work may wish to engage an independent archaeological consultant to assess a specification of works intended to satisfy an archaeological brief, to monitor the progress of the work, or to advise on the recommendations for any further action.
7. The curatorial staff of each Trust have full authority to ensure that an archaeological brief is adequately fulfilled at all stages, irrespective of the contractual arrangements.
8. The curatorial staff of each Trust will seek amendments to, or if necessary reject, any contracted piece of work which they consider does not fulfil the archaeological brief.
9. The curatorial staff of each Trust will be solely responsible for determining any recommendations for further action arising from an archaeological assessment or field evaluation carried out by an archaeological contractor.
there is this as well
http://www.cpat.org.uk/services/dc/dc.htm
Before we get too carried away though ... it would be good to see some statisitcs of fieldwork carried out in wales.. and by who..?
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - Sparky - 17th February 2008
Probably not worth the paper its written on. What would be more interesting is the differences in quality of approved WSIs, field work and reporting between Welsh and outside units, and the amount of time and effort that the Welsh curators devote to each bodies. Difficult to quantify but probably more revealing.
It might also be revealing to measure the above between each of the Welsh curatorial bodies and their respective trusts.
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - BAJR Host - 17th February 2008
Well an FOI should allow access to WSIs. ? Or does it?
Where can you find out what fieldwork was done where and when in Wales?
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - Unitof1 - 17th February 2008
Mr Moby youâre onto something. Have you considered taking these entities to the European Union for transgressing state aid legislation and distorting competition? Hours of fun and you will win. Heres a starting point...
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file42032.pdf
Conflicts of Interest in commercial archaeology - Gog - 17th February 2008
Quote:quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host
Where can you find out what fieldwork was done where and when in Wales?
Try 'Archaeology in Wales' produced annually by CBA Wales/Cymru, and a model of how regional round-ups should be done.
BUFAU did the fieldwork for the A5 upgrade across Anglesey, OAU North did the survey of Telford's A5, and OA snuck in and grabbed the Newport ship.