Ensuring Archaeology in the Planning System Delivers Public Benefit

Abstract

Archaeologists in the UK work in a variety of structures, but all archaeology is for the benefit of the public. Since 1990 the majority of archaeological work has been undertaken as part of the planning process. A complex system has evolved which attempts to deliver wider public benefit. There are differences between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but the underlying principles are broadly the same across the UK.

In 2020 radical changes were proposed to the planning system in England which could potentially impact on both the archaeological profession and the public benefits it generates. This paper outlines the evolution and operation of the current UK system with particular reference to England, and highlights some changes that the new proposals could make to the status quo. Some structural issues are highlighted which will need to be overcome for archaeologists to improve things for themselves and for the society they serve in the future.

keywords:

• planning
• development
• public benefit
• mitigation
• archaeology
• professionalism
• heritage

Acknowledgements

The author is extremely grateful for comments on earlier versions of this paper by Penelope Foreman, Mike Heyworth, Edward James, Rob Lennox and Esther Robinson Wild, as well as to the three anonymous referees. Any remaining factual errors, omissions, inconsistencies, and confusions are entirely the author's responsibility.

Notes

1 Most local government in England (125 councils) operates under a one-tier system (unitary authorities, metropolitan districts and London boroughs); in some places a two-tier system has survived, with 27 county councils containing 201 district councils. All 22 councils in Wales, and all 32 councils in Scotland, are unitary authorities. In Northern Ireland there are 11 district councils.

2 Also known as Local Development Plans (LDPs), the NPPF (2019) calls them ‘development plans’; other planning guidance, including the 2020 Planning White Paper, calls them ‘Local Plans’. For simplicity this term will be used here throughout.

3 A ‘heritage asset’ is defined in the NPPF as: ‘building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest’ (MCHLG, 2019: 67).

4 Statutory responsibility for scheduling in Scotland rests with Historic Environment Scotland, and is not a ministerial responsibility; in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland the relevant minister does have responsibility, advised by the heritage body which in England is an executive non-departmental public body (Historic England), and in Wales and Northern Ireland part of the civil service (Cadw and the Department of the Environment Northern Ireland — Historic Environment Division respectively).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Paul Belford

Dr Paul Belford FSA MCIfA is an archaeologist who has worked in commercial archaeology, museums, and as a consultant, and also briefly in academia. He is currently the Director of the Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust, which provides a range of curatorial and commercial archaeological services in Wales and England. The views expressed in this paper are entirely personal and do not represent the views of any organizations the author is, or has been, associated with.