Internet Archaeology 57. Archaeology and Public Benefit. EAC symposium proceedings

The challenge of providing public benefit from development control archaeology has been a concern across Europe after both the Valletta and Faro conventions encouraged the view that the public must be the key beneficiaries of archaeological work, and since then the theoretical concept of public benefit has become well recognised across our profession. However, it seems to me that the archaeological sector does not yet provide this in a meaningful way or know how to maximise the public benefit potential of our work; indeed, this is acknowledged at the highest levels (e.g. British Academy 2017, 33).The EAC established their Working Group on 'Making the Case' to investigate examples of best practice and provide a practical toolkit for the better articulation of public benefit arising from development-led archaeology (EAC 2019). In the UK the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists has published a briefing document that outlines the potential for public benefit offered by archaeology (CIfA 2020). This dovetails well with a new research project, funded by United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) and hosted at Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA), intended to ensure that public benefit is at the heart of decision-making throughout the development control sector in the UK (MOLA 2019). This article provides an introduction to the rationale behind this project and outlines how the project ambitions could be achieved through a careful navigation through the complex structures of development programmes' procurement and management.

In the Autumn of 2016, the archaeological sector in Northern Ireland came together in the first of a series of meetings and collaborations to consider how the sector needs to change to meet the challenges that it faces, especially in the context of development-led interventions. The products of that collaboration were published in December 2020 as Archaeology 2030: A Strategic Approach for Northern Ireland. The core vision of that document is this: that the heritage sector, and the archaeological sector in particular, wants archaeology to be accessed and valued by as many people as possible, led by a sector which is healthy, resilient and connected. This article is intended to give some context to how this coming together happened, how it has progressed, and to offer some perspective and reflections on where the journey may go in the future.

A major urban development in Cork City entailed dewatering and very deep excavations for new basements. This revealed significant archaeology from the Viking period, which was excavated where necessary. A very successful series of public events followed, with senior politicians visiting. This paper concludes by emphasising the need to provide the public with accurate information.

A discipline where several scientific fields meet, archaeology studies the material traces of civilisations, from prehistory to the contemporary era. By enriching our knowledge of the societies that came before us, it contributes to a better understanding of today's world and helps sharpen citizens' critical outlook. When it comes to protection, conservation, awareness-raising and education, archaeological heritage is a significant societal opportunity for Europe. At a time marked by concerns over identity and community, archaeology is a source of openness and tolerance. The European Archaeology Days can therefore help shape a common identity, while preserving the cultural diversity that characterises a Europe of multiplicity. Developing this initiative could encourage open access to culture for all and, among future generations, foster acceptance of the 'Other' in all their differences. In this context, it feels important to give the event a European dimension.

Three recent examples of public benefit following archaeological discoveries in London are presented, alongside an explanation of the policy context that supports them. The examples are provided from the perspective of planning archaeologists, who advise decision makers and developers on managing archaeological sites in compliance with local and national policy.The cases illustrate ad hoc public benefits secured following surprise discoveries at an excavation in Tottenham, as well as long-term benefits resulting from staged investigation and negotiation of two Elizabethan playhouses in Shoreditch and Aldgate. We discuss issues around encouraging and operating permanent visitor attractions and how to best secure the benefits deriving from those places through the UK planning system. We suggest some ways for this young field to develop further.

This article outlines the theory and strategy behind Historic England's (HE) Wellbeing Strategy. It acknowledges the relevance of wellbeing to HE's core purpose, and proposes ways in which wellbeing can be built into archaeological and heritage projects. There is an evidenced link between access to heritage and wellbeing, which now needs to be better integrated into project design and implementation. The article concludes with an outline strategy for wellbeing-led projects, and a discussion of how the success of these projects could be evaluated.

Understanding the public by analysing the wants, interests and expectations regarding their involvement in archaeology is one of the strategic aims of Europae Archaeologiae Consilium (EAC). Cultural heritage has been the topic of several public opinion polls in Poland over the past few years. In 2011 and 2015, the Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa (National Institute of Cultural Heritage) carried out two representative surveys. Subsequent polls focusing on more specific issues or groups of respondents were undertaken in 2015, 2017 and 2018. Other data from Poland come from the 2017 Special Eurobarometer survey on cultural heritage. They can be contrasted with archaeology-orientated opinion polls: a Europe-wide survey carried out within the NEARCH project led by Inrap (French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research) and several smaller-scale projects, which might be treated as starting points for more representative research.The scope of these surveys includes: public perception of cultural heritage and archaeology, subjective value of cultural heritage, attitudes towards archaeology, relevance of archaeology for the present (also in terms of the socio-economic potential of archaeological heritage), people's interaction with archaeology and archaeological heritage, sources of information about archaeological heritage etc.Comparison of these data will serve to establish the relevance of surveys for archaeological heritage management. The author will also examine if the specific nature of archaeological heritage is reflected in the surveys and how the public feels about its most hidden heritage. Based on the results of her analysis, the author will look at the desired scope of a survey aimed at filling the identified gaps and shaped to fit the needs of evidence-based archaeological heritage management.

While the knowledge creation benefits of archaeology are widely understood, there is less awareness or assessment of other potential benefits. These can be associated with wellbeing and health, including mental health. These are significant given that archaeology is a creative and outdoor activity with the potential to enhance social bond through collaborative working. Using data from the NEARCH survey of 2015, this paper seeks to encourage wider participation in archaeology, enabling much more public benefit to be realised.

When we assembled in Prague for the 21st EAC Symposium in March 2020 we could never have imagined how the rest of the year would develop and it is with gratitude to the various authors, editors and EAC colleagues that I can present this volume of the papers on behalf of the EAC. The event was kindly hosted by the National Museum in Prague. Over the two days of papers twenty one speakers presented, their presentations are available for download.The theme of the Symposium was 'Public Benefit from development-led archaeology: moving the debate forward' and the papers here reflect the challenges and opportunities this presents. As outlined in the Valletta Convention (Article 9) the public must be the key beneficiaries of archaeological work and the theoretical concept of public benefit has become well recognised across our profession but there is still some way to go to fully understand and maximise its potential. The concept note for the 21st Symposium asked attendees to reflect upon the challenge of positively shaping the future and embedding the concept of public benefit into our practice; from project inception through design and implementation to dissemination. The papers are a fascinating illustration of how public benefit is viewed across the member states, incorporating honest acknowledgements of some of the entrenched challenges involved with creating a new way of working.This volume naturally follows on from the volume which reported on the 20th Symposium held in Dublin, with the focus moving from the responsibilities of a state body to ensure public benefit from sites and monuments to the various complex issues surrounding private development, public regulatory frameworks and the role of archaeologists in embedding and providing meaningful public benefit.Within all these papers is the thread of the political context of archaeological heritage management, whether development-led or not, which may be different in national settings but nevertheless is similar in that different stakeholders will require different things from us as archaeologists and we must navigate this responsibly. Papers included here highlight the need for communication and collaboration with others to ensure a successful range of benefits are provided, with an additional focus on the need to persuade clients and developers of their obligations when engaging with a shared past. Although many states have yet to ratify the Faro Convention there is growing awareness of the need to enable public engagement and enjoyment of archaeological heritage, and the EAC's work developing online resources and guidance is intended to provide a wider perspective on archaeology (see Sloane, this volume).There are significant attempts at innovation within this volume, which reflects the concluding session of the Symposium and the wide-ranging discussion around changing current practice to ensure public benefit. I hope that future meetings of the EAC can go ahead safely and successfully to continue this vital work.