logoEEA.png

Call for proposals - EEA 2017 session #55 and #163

Archaeologists from NIKU are receiving proposals for papers for two sessions at the 23rd EAA Annual Meeting in Maastricht.

Session: #55

Theme:

Twenty-five Years after Maastricht: Archaeology and Europe's future

Session format:

Discussion session: As we are planning to write a discussion article based on the session we would like a mix between a keynote and a round table: A 15 min introduction/keynote, 5-10 min contributions from a handful of discussants and then open discussion. Feel free to put us in the category you see fit.

Title:

Archaeology and the European far-right: attitudes and responses from heritage bureaucracies

Content:

Heritage bureaucracies represent a combination of technologies, texts and communities of practice that have been given a mandate to manage the remains of the past and transform political directives into action; whether it is through funding programmes, guidelines for archaeological archives and museums, or by setting priorities for Cultural Resource Management.

Thus, they form part of the political fabric that makes up contemporary Europe at local, regional, national and international levels. As this fabric is increasingly torn in conflicting directions, the ideas about what heritage and archaeology should “do” for society changes. Marking the 25th anniversary of Maastricht, the politics of the past are as relevant as ever. In this session, we examine heritage bureaucracies’ attitudes and responses to the rise of the European far-right.

More specifically, we want to explore the following: What characterises far-right heritage policy? How do the often slow-moving structures of heritage bureaucracies impact the implementation of far-right policies? How are policies pushed forward or stalled through governing tools such as laws, planning regulations, white papers, budgets and management plans? In what way have the conditions introduced by New Public Management since the 1980s affected the possibility for far-right policies to take hold?

Finally, we want to address how the rise of the far-right in different parts of Europe may force forth a situation where heritage bureaucracies have to address the fine line between limits of political compliance and academic ideals of democratizing heritage.

Keywords:

Heritage Politics, Compliance, Far-right, Democratization

Organisers

Main organiser:

Elisabeth Niklasson (United States) 1

Co-organisers:

Herdis Hølleland (Norway) 2

Affiliations:

1. Stanford University
2. Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research

 

Session: #163

Theme:

The Valletta Convention: the next 25 years

Session format:

Session, made up of a combination of papers, max. 15 minutes each

Title & Content

Title:

in situ preservation at a time of changing climate

Content:

Twenty-five years after the agreement on the Valletta Convention, an evaluation of archaeological and heritage management practice relating to in situ preservation seems relevant, particularly in the light of predicted climate change and its effects on heritage sites. In situ preservation strategies place a large responsibility on present and future generations. Recent research indicates that in situ preservation in some cases may be more an illusion than reality.

If archaeological sites are chosen for in situ preservation, the whole wording of the treaty should be followed. Sites should be monitored to evaluate their current state, safeguarded with physical protection measures or mitigation actions and communicated to both the scientific community and a wider audience. In this way one implements both the Valletta and Faro Conventions.

Climate research has documented changes that have already happened. A global temperature rise of 1°C above average of the pre-industrial world was reached in 2015, leading to potential threats to heritage sites. Projections indicate that associated problems will increase in the future. As sites are threatened, heritage managers must develop new strategies. These can range from techniques to mitigate the effects, to tools that help decide when in situ preservation is no longer a viable option to save a site.

This session invites papers and posters that present views on preservation in situ in relation to the impacts of climate change. Topics include possibilities and limitations, sustainable mitigation strategies, and systems for site evaluation to help decide between in situ or ex situ preservation.

Keywords:

climate change; heritage management strategies

Session affiliated with MERC:

yes

Organisers

Main organiser:

Vibeke Vandrup Martens (Norway) 1

Co-organisers:

Thomas McGovern (United States) 2
Tom Dawson (United Kingdom) 3

Affiliations:

1. NIKU - Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research
2. Hunter College CUNY
3. University of St Andrews

 

Publisert