Research be seen as integral to development excavation.

[Odinn]

Odinn - as I think I pointed out a couple of pages above, most curators don't have a PhD in everything that might be found on an eval, half the time (more, actually) they never turn up on site anyway, and they're generally far too overworked to start peer-reviewing stuff (and I'm not clear that that's part of their remit anyway - Vulpes want to contribute on that?), which will obviously get considerably worse if the expected mass-cull occurs in the next year or so.

I don't think anyone suggested that curators did have PhDs in everything, but then one might turn that comment around and point out that neither site staff nor consultants generally have PhDs in everything that might turn up on an evaluation either, yet they take responsibility for the management and excavation of those sites. That is not really the point though and it should also be pointed out that many do have detailed knowledge of their area from working in it for so long. However, that is largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. No one ever said that peer-review lay within the remit of the curator. The comment was made that formal peer-review might be a means to establish academic credibility for reports that are produced. If it were to be introduced, then the curator is the logical person to co-ordinate this process, as the person with oversight of the fieldwork and reporting. Yes, it would add to their burden and that might preclude its adoption. I understand that curators are often overworked. I also understand that if there is a mass cull then curators will be even more stretched than before so adoption of peer review might well not be practical in the slightest.

However, from your comments I think you may not fully understand what peer review is and how it works. The point of peer review is that the report/article is sent to the person that is best placed to understand and comment on its content (not necessarily the curator of that area). It is reviewed anonymously (neither reader nor writer knows who the other is). The curator, in this instance, would send the report to the reviewer and forward the comments (along with any of their own) to the writer for action, so that the report could be formally issued and the condition discharged.