TY - JOUR
T1 - An evaluation of community-led archaeology projects funded through the Heritage Lottery Fund
T2 - Two case studies
AU - Mitchell, William
AU - Colls, Kevin
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like specially to thank Suzie Thomas for her expert support and advice during the many revisions of this paper, Sara Crofts of the HLF and Caroline Sturdy Colls for her suggestions. We would also like to thank all those who made the Dig for Shakespeare and St Giles Churchyard projects possible including all the staff and volunteers involved, without whom these projects would have not been so successful.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2020/1/2
Y1 - 2020/1/2
N2 - Community archaeology projects have gained popularity for many reasons. In the UK, professional archaeology has championed involving community volunteers in Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) supported archaeological projects. We review two HLF-supported community-led projects, including the positive and measurable outcomes in conjunction with the challenges that each presented. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of working with community volunteers. Due to our direct responsibility for supervising the volunteers and all the archaeological aspects of these projects, we are able to analyse their success and delivery, and the benefits and drawbacks of using the HLF for project funding. This includes how they regulate access to funding, and how they evaluate the process. Finally, we examine commercial archaeological companies and the extent to which the HLF holds them accountable for outcomes, questioning how these outcomes feed into archaeological research frameworks and contribute to professional practice.
AB - Community archaeology projects have gained popularity for many reasons. In the UK, professional archaeology has championed involving community volunteers in Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) supported archaeological projects. We review two HLF-supported community-led projects, including the positive and measurable outcomes in conjunction with the challenges that each presented. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of working with community volunteers. Due to our direct responsibility for supervising the volunteers and all the archaeological aspects of these projects, we are able to analyse their success and delivery, and the benefits and drawbacks of using the HLF for project funding. This includes how they regulate access to funding, and how they evaluate the process. Finally, we examine commercial archaeological companies and the extent to which the HLF holds them accountable for outcomes, questioning how these outcomes feed into archaeological research frameworks and contribute to professional practice.
KW - Community archaeology
KW - Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF)
KW - New Place
KW - public archaeology
KW - volunteer archaeology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070959227&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/20518196.2019.1655865
DO - 10.1080/20518196.2019.1655865
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85070959227
VL - 7
SP - 17
EP - 34
JO - Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage
JF - Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage
SN - 2051-8196
IS - 1
ER -
