<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<!--<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="article.xsl"?>-->
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" xml:lang="en"
    xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
    <front>
        <journal-meta>
            <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher"/>
            <journal-title-group>
                <journal-title>Papers from the Institute of Archaeology</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
            <issn>2041-9015</issn>
            <publisher>
                <publisher-name>Ubiquity Press</publisher-name>
            </publisher>
        </journal-meta>
        <article-meta>
            <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5334/pia.440</article-id>
            <article-categories>
                <subj-group>
                    <subject>Forum</subject>
                </subj-group>
            </article-categories>
            <title-group>
                <article-title>The Challenges and Opportunities for Mega-Infrastructure Projects and
                    Archaeology</article-title>
            </title-group>
            <contrib-group>
                <contrib contrib-type="author">
                    <name>
                        <surname>Jackson</surname>
                        <given-names>Sophie</given-names>
                    </name>
                    <email>sjackson@mola.org.uk</email>
                    <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/>
                </contrib>
            </contrib-group>
            <aff id="aff-1">Senior Consultant MOLA (Museum of London Archaeology), United
                Kingdom</aff>
            <pub-date publication-format="electronic" iso-8601-date="2013-10-09">
                <day>09</day>
                <month>10</month>
                <year>2013</year>
            </pub-date>
            <volume>23</volume>
            <issue>1</issue>
            <elocation-id>21</elocation-id>
            <permissions>
                <copyright-statement>Copyright: &#x00A9; 2013 The Author(s)</copyright-statement>
                <copyright-year>2013</copyright-year>
                <license license-type="open-access"
                    xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">
                    <license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
                        Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY 3.0), which permits
                        unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
                        original author and source are credited. See <uri
                            xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"
                            >http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</uri>.</license-p>
                </license>
            </permissions>
            <self-uri xlink:href="http://www.pia-journal.co.uk/article/view/pia.440" />
        </article-meta>
    </front>
    <body>
        <p>Jay Carver&#8217;s paper is very useful in summarising the process that Crossrail has
            followed and identifing the key factors in managing the risk, and maximising the
            benefits, associated with archaeology on major infrastructure projects.</p>
        <p>MOLA (Museum of London Archaeology) has been involved in many of London&#8217;s
            infrastructure projects, at the consultancy, planning, and mitigation stages. Over the
            past 30 years we have witnessed an evolution in the approach taken when dealing with the
            historic environment on major projects such as the Jubilee Line Extension, and the
            recent rail improvements to the East London Line and Thameslink.</p>
        <sec>
            <title>Early Consultation</title>
            <p>The lead article explores the importance of consultation during the early planning
                stages of Crossrail, which allowed key stakeholders to contribute to and make
                submissions during the examination of the Crossrail hybrid bill in parliament.
                Following the changes introduced by the Planning Act 2008, and amended by the
                Localism Act 2011, mega-infrastructure projects now go through the National
                Infrastructure Planning Process. The intention is to streamline decision-making for
                nationally significant infrastructure projects, improving the situation for
                developers and communities alike and providing consultation at key stages.</p>
            <p>One new development which increases opportunities for consultation is the requirement
                to prepare a Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR), before the
                Environmental Statement (ES). MOLA prepared the historic environment components of
                the Thames Tideway Tunnel PEIR and ES and we have found this two-stage process to be
                extremely helpful. This development allowed consultees (English Heritage, Local
                Authority planning archaeologists, local amenity societies) to come forward with
                additional information, queries, comments, and recommendations for mitigation in the
                early stages of the process.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec>
            <title>Centralisation, Continuity and Consistency</title>
            <p>The lead article also notes the importance of central contracts for building in
                continuity and consistency within a project. In the case of Crossrail this has been
                achieved with the Project Archaeologist (Jay Carver) being embedded in the
                management structure, directing the archaeological framework suppliers on different
                packages of work. This provides the client with security that the archaeological
                aspects of the project are being managed to a consistent standard, and there is no
                doubt that this centralised approach has been crucial for the strategic design and
                implementation of the archaeological mitigation.</p>
            <p>I would go further and say that most mega-projects also benefit from an overarching
                research strategy, bringing together the relevant objectives from existing research
                frameworks and strategies. This can frame and inform work at the planning stage and
                allows the subsequent evaluation and mitigation phases to be targeted, as well as
                providing a &#8216;vision&#8217; for the archaeological work; one that should evolve
                as the archaeological results become available.</p>
            <p>The commitment to maintaining continuity of archaeological teams, from enabling works
                to post-excavation work for each package of work (involving multiple sites), is one
                that deserves support. Whilst it is of course common for archaeologists to use and
                interpret archives produced by others, I think most of us have moved away from a
                view that archaeological context sheets, plans and records capture everything of the
                story of a programme of archaeological work. Undoubtedly, details can be lost in
                translation. Archaeological investigation requires experience and judgement to
                identify and interpret physical remains in the ground. Continuity of the team
                through critical stages allows for more connections to be made over the course of
                the project and for a better result to be delivered overall.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec>
            <title>Quantification &#8211; Speaking the Right Language</title>
            <p>One of the most important points to be raised is the need to present archaeological
                requirements in a form that the other procurement professionals, construction
                managers, and project managers understand. This means quantities; times, volumes,
                numbers of people. Words don&#8217;t help, it is the numbers that will get us
                noticed and ensure we are built into programmes, even if these numbers are initially
                best guesses based on available information. Archaeological contractors should take
                note of this because it can only help to demystify what we do.</p>
            <p>However on some projects more work can be done to achieve cooperation and genuine
                understanding from main contractors. We still need better ways of aligning the
                delivery of archaeological work with the interest of other contractors on the site.
                Ignoring the archaeologists won&#8217;t speed up the process; in fact the opposite
                is often the case. We need mutual understanding of each other&#8217;s activities and
                needs, as well as real integration. This is going to be achieved by building
                relationships in construction teams and finding balanced solutions, as Jay
                notes.</p>
        </sec>
        <sec>
            <title>Opportunities</title>
            <p>The opportunities presented by these mega-projects are clearly set out. These include
                investment in methodological and technical improvements where they can deliver
                benefits to the project, for example speeding up recording or analysis. There are
                opportunities for skills development, learning from the construction industry, and
                also the prospect of very effective programmes of public outreach linked to other
                environmental and sustainability programmes. This can include facilitating
                archaeological apprenticeships on these big programmes. In this respect there can be
                conflicting requirements on some of the mega-projects. There may be a specification
                to have staff with a certain minimum amount of experience and also a desire to train
                and employ local people through apprenticeships. A bit of flexibility and joined up
                thinking across project procurement would help us to cope with this.</p>
            <p>Above all we should share knowledge and experience across the archaeology sector. The
                Institute of Archaeology seminar in February 2013 provided a very useful overview of
                innovation and lessons learnt from major UK infrastructure projects. This PIA Forum
                is another opportunity to share information and to improve the position of
                archaeology on these really important, game changing projects. Long may they
                continue!</p>
        </sec>
    </body>
</article>
