29th April 2010, 04:53 PM
Local or community archaeology is most certainly a key issue that underpins the RAE.
Archaeology specifically, from my measure of inexperience, certainly has a long way to go in the development of this area. Management and direction will be very challenging, whilst integrating all the stakeholders into any given project. This will particularly be the case, when it comes down to ensuring the future of this area does not fall into a back footed response to any given immediate demand.
The integration of community archaeology into a commercial development project would be a very difficult project, which to be honest would be more by opportunity than design, but this will require a significant momentum and research into the potential areas that will tick the boxes for any given involvement.
As for training this will very much come down to the commitment of any stakeholders to any given project design and that will be reflected in the focus and direction placed upon it by any given leadership.
And let’s face it whomever leads these projects will be directing them for the gain of specific stakeholders and will be highly political in nature.
This will not be simple and will involve highly complex issues and probably in some cases could take years to initiate, and thus commitment will have to be taken into consideration of the realistic projects and their design parameters.
If the IFA is of the mind that the industry is self-regulated then in the short to midterm that will not change and thus would mean that initiation of projects will have to move forward without that kind of formalised support.
So now we must turn to the issue of employment.
If there is no funding from any existing bodies to initiate or support project design, then it’s going to be heavily dependent on voluntary additional work outside of the working week.
This may seem natural to the industry, but if a demand is suddenly placed upon the industry, the funding infrastructure is just not there to support it outside of any given employer whilst additionally trying to get your paid job done.
There is no doubt we must begin to identify the real work that will be involved in any formulation of projects, let alone the risk of non-initiation.
it is true however that pontification will for nought, but mostly upon the basis that we continue to keep our heads buried in the sand and expecting some other direction from government, local authorities, curators, employers and other heritage NGO's.
This lack of direction and lack of a professionalization for the role of community project initiation will severely hold back any development in a clear development that will be able to provide for the investing stakeholders.
We must remember, however that these stakeholders are not anything or anyone new. These people are the very people we work and deal with on a regular basis now, the only difference is the manner and level of prioritisation given over to any of these people based upon a demand for the involvement of the very public, and for whom we have been working all these years.
Archaeology specifically, from my measure of inexperience, certainly has a long way to go in the development of this area. Management and direction will be very challenging, whilst integrating all the stakeholders into any given project. This will particularly be the case, when it comes down to ensuring the future of this area does not fall into a back footed response to any given immediate demand.
The integration of community archaeology into a commercial development project would be a very difficult project, which to be honest would be more by opportunity than design, but this will require a significant momentum and research into the potential areas that will tick the boxes for any given involvement.
As for training this will very much come down to the commitment of any stakeholders to any given project design and that will be reflected in the focus and direction placed upon it by any given leadership.
And let’s face it whomever leads these projects will be directing them for the gain of specific stakeholders and will be highly political in nature.
This will not be simple and will involve highly complex issues and probably in some cases could take years to initiate, and thus commitment will have to be taken into consideration of the realistic projects and their design parameters.
If the IFA is of the mind that the industry is self-regulated then in the short to midterm that will not change and thus would mean that initiation of projects will have to move forward without that kind of formalised support.
So now we must turn to the issue of employment.
If there is no funding from any existing bodies to initiate or support project design, then it’s going to be heavily dependent on voluntary additional work outside of the working week.
This may seem natural to the industry, but if a demand is suddenly placed upon the industry, the funding infrastructure is just not there to support it outside of any given employer whilst additionally trying to get your paid job done.
There is no doubt we must begin to identify the real work that will be involved in any formulation of projects, let alone the risk of non-initiation.
it is true however that pontification will for nought, but mostly upon the basis that we continue to keep our heads buried in the sand and expecting some other direction from government, local authorities, curators, employers and other heritage NGO's.
This lack of direction and lack of a professionalization for the role of community project initiation will severely hold back any development in a clear development that will be able to provide for the investing stakeholders.
We must remember, however that these stakeholders are not anything or anyone new. These people are the very people we work and deal with on a regular basis now, the only difference is the manner and level of prioritisation given over to any of these people based upon a demand for the involvement of the very public, and for whom we have been working all these years.
...................
not again
not again