Breaking New Ground: how archaeology works (BOOK)

[Unitof1]

May it also depend on your definition of a private sector archaeologist?

[CARTOON REALITY]

Yes, but I'm wondering who the first (non-state, non-altruistic) developer to fund archaeology was. I think we should send him a Christmas card.

[Unitof1]

are you including backhanders?

[Unitof1]

It would appear from this that the little old ladies only started coughing up as a result of ppg16

Through the 80s BUFAU had flourished but government policies were changing and in 1988 funding through the Manpower Services Commission was coming to an end.Like many managers of archaeological units at the time I stared forlornly into my beer and wondered what we were going to do.Fortunately, largely through the efforts of Geoff Wainwright, English Heritage’s Chief Archaeologist, things were about to take a turn for the better.November 1990 saw the introduction of the DoE’s ‘Planning Policy Guidance Note 16’ (PPG 16), whereby archaeology became a ‘material consideration’ in the planning process and through which the principle that the ‘polluter pays’ became enshrined.Thus from the beginning of the 1990s onwards, developer funding became the principal source of funding for the work

http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/Issue_01/Buteux.htm

It would appear that the MSC scam paid for the archaeology lock stock and barrel through the eighties, all very communist. Be interesting to know how much was spent? preportion of gdp etc

[CARTOON REALITY]

So who do we send the Christmas card to?

[Unitof1]

well it might be somebody who paid up after aprox1990 but what if the job was carried out by a unit that had council subsidies. Does that count because you could say that the little old lady did not pay up in full, which is a common want.

[kevin wooldridge]

For the UK I think the trajectory is something like:
1960s major government projects (eg motorways) trigger state archaeological response with additional funding from the Dept Transport etc

mid 1970s govt funding goes to external units to undertake rescue work, some major private developments pay towards archaeology

early 1980s shift towards developers funding major arch costs (post-consent)

1989 PPG16 (England) introduces polluter pays principle to planning, pre-determination evaluation

I think you have missed out one funding option. During the 60s and 70s there were Section 53 orders (latterly renamed section 106 orders) where basically developers could fund archaeology as local authority 'planning gain' from their developments. I think this is what happened at the Brooks in Winchester c 1972 plus of course some of the county and town units recieved funding from local authorities that was derived from section 53 orders (the Southwark and Lambeth Unit c 1977) . The first developer funded excavation in the City of London was circa 1976 slightly ahead I think of similarly funded projects in York and Southampton....biut of course private individuals were paying for excavations long before this....various excavations in the Middle East were 'sponsored' in this way. I know for a fact that the Danish Milk Board were funding archaeological work in Qatar from the early 1950s....even further back St Helena was funding excavations in Jeruslaem (320AD) and then building churches on sites identified with Christian associations ...so 'developer' funding is as old as archaeology itself!!

[Unitof1]

under what act was the section 53 orders made?

[CARTOON REALITY]

even further back St Helena was funding excavations in Jeruslaem (320AD)

That's no good to me, I can hardly send Saint Helena a Christmas card. I think Nabonidus of Babylon was up to much the same thing 556-539 BC.
Where did she publish?

[kevin wooldridge]

Oops apologies for typo. I meant of course section 52 not 53 orders.

I believe Uo1 it derives from section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act of 1971 which itself replaced a similar provision dating back to 1949