The practice of CRM takes place within the legal framework discussed above. In the United States, for example, the practice of CRM is focused on compliance with Section 106 of NHPA, which requires that federal agencies consider the impact of their actions upon significant historic properties and that the ACHP be given an opportunity to comment on their actions. Compliance with Section 106 is a process with several steps. Before initiating the compliance process, the proposed action must have federal involvement (an ‘undertaking’) and must have the potential to have an impact upon cultural resources. If so, a review is required. The next step is consultation among concerned parties or stakeholders, which may include the SHPO (or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) in the case of Indian tribes), Indian tribes, local governments, applicants for federal funds or permits, and the public. Identifying historic properties then takes place (sometimes called phase I) and involves defining the ‘area of potential effects’ of the proposed action and reviewing existing information from documents (e. g., site records), oral histories, consultations, reconnaissance surveys, ground-surface examination, shovel testing, and limited test excavations.
The next step is evaluation (or phase II) to determine whether or not the identified properties are eligible for listing on the national register. Phase II gathers more detailed data about the property from intensive pedestrian surveys, remote sensing, controlled surface collection, and patterned test excavations. The evaluation process involves the application of the national register criteria of historical significance, assessment of whether the historic property retains enough integrity to convey its significance, and determination of whether or not the property should be exempted if it is in a category excluded from listing on the national register (e. g., cemeteries). Determining whether or not the proposed action will have ‘adverse effects’ upon historic properties found to be eligible for the national register is the next step in the evaluation process and often involves the preparation of a memorandum of agreement between the federal agency and an SHPO/THPO. Phase III or mitigation of adverse effects is the next step. Mitigation may involve architectural documentation of buildings and structures, archaeological data recovery such as large-scale excavation, the preparation of oral histories, public outreach or educational activities such as museum displays or brochures, or moving the proposed project to another location to avoid adverse effects.
The organizational structure of CRM practice also varies. In some countries, CRM mostly takes place within a centralized organization (e. g., the Archaeological Survey of India or Mexico’s INAH). Other countries have a much more decentralized system in which the practice of CRM takes place at the level of states (e. g., the independent states in the erstwhile Federal Republic of Germany), regions, or localities. The private sector practices most CRM in some countries, for example, the United Kingdom and the United States, but not in others (e. g., Sweden, where most CRM is done by the National Heritage Board or county museums). CRM practice also varies widely as a function of whether cultural resource laws apply to private (e. g., Sweden, Argentina) or to public property (e. g., the United States).
See also: Antiquities and Cultural Heritage Legislation; Careers in Archaeology; Environmental Impact Assessment and the Law; Ethical Issues and Responsibilities; Historic Preservation Laws; Who Owns the Past?; World Heritage Sites, Types and Laws.
World History
