26th January 2012, 04:14 PM
I don't believe that the timing has any immediate trigger- the need for some form of professional guidance on curatorial activities has been recognised since the first IfA Standards were proposed, but it has taken a long time for ALGAO to accept that the IfA should be the lead body.
But I think it is timely in an era of cuts - it is currently quite hard to defend archaeological posts providing specialist advice when there is no particular qualification for the service provided, so that responsibilities can be handed on to somebody else or posts merged. The principle that planning services need archaeologists is strengthened by codification of their role (and the expertise they need to apply).
IfA should in any case not be leading the defence of curatorial services - that should be ALGAO and CBA.
But I think it is timely in an era of cuts - it is currently quite hard to defend archaeological posts providing specialist advice when there is no particular qualification for the service provided, so that responsibilities can be handed on to somebody else or posts merged. The principle that planning services need archaeologists is strengthened by codification of their role (and the expertise they need to apply).
IfA should in any case not be leading the defence of curatorial services - that should be ALGAO and CBA.