9th January 2013, 01:42 PM
'It should not have become the industry standard it now is.'
GnomeKing is right to point out that this document should not be accepted on an uncritical basis - there are some fundamental issues reagrding the methodologies etc. I'm not sure that it has become an 'industry standard' - plenty of people within the industry (including myself) have our own preferred ways of approaching evaluation on a site-by-site basis according to a number of parameters. However the document stands as the only one of its type and therefore has some relevance - I have been involved in Pubklic Inquiries where it is cited as a Core Document and variations from its conclusions and recommendations have had to be justified in cross-examination.
Perhaps it is time for a renewed survey to look at the post-2001 data and recent practices (strip, map & sample, anyone). There is a bit of discussion in the CIRIA 2008 report Archaeology and Development: A good practice guide to managing risk and maximising benefit, but that document is aimed a different target audience to the one here (as the title indicates).
Beamo
GnomeKing is right to point out that this document should not be accepted on an uncritical basis - there are some fundamental issues reagrding the methodologies etc. I'm not sure that it has become an 'industry standard' - plenty of people within the industry (including myself) have our own preferred ways of approaching evaluation on a site-by-site basis according to a number of parameters. However the document stands as the only one of its type and therefore has some relevance - I have been involved in Pubklic Inquiries where it is cited as a Core Document and variations from its conclusions and recommendations have had to be justified in cross-examination.
Perhaps it is time for a renewed survey to look at the post-2001 data and recent practices (strip, map & sample, anyone). There is a bit of discussion in the CIRIA 2008 report Archaeology and Development: A good practice guide to managing risk and maximising benefit, but that document is aimed a different target audience to the one here (as the title indicates).
Beamo