One of the greatest dangers that EIA archaeology, and EIA in general, face is that they will become so standardized, so routine, that they neither attract talented people to their practice nor accomplish very much for the environment. This tendency is apparent in the United States, where EIA archaeologists in particular seem to be falling into rote ways of finding and describing sites, of describing and analyzing impacts, of reporting results, and even of conducting data recovery excavations. Standardization can be useful, but it can also stultify creativity. It also creates a process of impact analysis that is opaque to the
Figure 6 Even animals can be important cultural heritage resources, requiring careful attention by EIA archaeologists. The Okinawa dugong is important in the traditional culture of Japan, and has been the subject of recent litigation over the effects proposed U. S. Department of Defense projects may have on it. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, permission given.
Public, laden with jargon and unexamined assumptions. We do things in particular ways because it is the way we always do them, and we describe what we do in terms that can be understood only by others who do the same things. This is not only a formula for bad research and useless results, for lost and destroyed archaeological sites; it is also something that will in the end erode public support for the whole EIA enterprise.
To conclude on a personal note, the author’s belief is that in order to survive and thrive, EIA archaeology must become truly more than archaeology; archaeologists must not only work with members of other disciplines in an interdisciplinary manner, we must become interdisciplinary ourselves. We need to go beyond archaeology to address the impacts of change and development on the whole cultural environment - the ways people relate to natural resources, their belief systems, the spiritual values they attach to places, plants, animals, vistas (Figure 6). We need to relate in a positive, open, consultative manner to the public in all its multifaceted richness, bringing people into our analyses and making sure that our results make sense to them. The reason for doing EIA is to maintain the viability of the environment while getting on with needed change. This should be, and can be, a creative, challenging enterprise in which archaeologists can play important roles.
Many archaeologists now make their careers doing or supervising EIA work for private companies and governmental bodies, and most twenty-first century archaeologists will take part in EIA for at least portions of their working lives. Some research archaeologists think of this as being like a jail sentence, and for some it doubtless is. For others, however, it is an opportunity to do some of the most exciting, rewarding, and socially significant work to which an archaeologist’s talents can be bent.
See also: Antiquities and Cultural Heritage Legislation; Careers in Archaeology; Cultural Resource Management; Goals of Archaeology, Overview.
World History
