Canadian cultural resource management archeologists — professional consultants involved in environmental assessment and compliance processes — are increasingly finding themselves in the public eye when their work intersects with the development or disaster response related infrastructure projects.
Public or media discussions often arise when delays in construction result from archeological assessments or Indigenous opposition. Yet, many more developments proceed without issue.
Today, these concerns are part of a variety of challenges including labour shortages, meaningful Indigenous engagement and recent legislative changes that guide how development occurs.
These challenges must be addressed to ensure timely assessment and approval of development projects through legally binding processes, without comprising the assessment and preservation of archeological sites — the overwhelming majority of which are Indigenous ancestral sites.
Demand for archeological professionals in Canada is quickly outpacing the number of students graduating with archeology or anthropology degrees. A similar deficit of archeologists has been demonstrated in the United States.
Post-secondary institutions can play a key role in addressing this deficit by altering and improving degree programs to ensure students are equipped with the knowledge needed to succeed in cultural resource management.
The politics of archeology
Cultural resource management (CRM) involves identifying, preserving and maintaining valuable cultural heritage like ancestral artifacts and built heritage. In Canada, this kind of archeological work is required ahead of most infrastructure development through provincial and federal legislation.
Recent political developments in Canada, including federal bill C-5 and similar legislation in Ontario and British Columbia, have the potential to impact the scope of environmental assessment work, including associated archeology work.
In order to speed economic development, these laws allow governments to exempt some infrastructure projects from archeological assessment prior to construction and bypass requirements for Indigenous consultation. This moves decision-making on archeological preservation away from Indigenous communities and trained professionals and into the political sphere.
Such exemptions risk violating the treaty rights of First Nations and causing irreparable harm to Indigenous ancestral sites without consideration or assessment, deepening conflicts between development proponents and Indigenous communities. These conflicts may themselves delay construction of infrastructure.
Where are all the archaeologists?
Our recent study indicates there are between 419 and 713 archeologists employed in cultural resource management in Canada. These are almost certainly underestimates. However, our study further suggests that labour market demand is outpacing supply.
Fifty-five responding employers across the country reported unfilled positions, including for jobs at all levels of experience. Overall, the CRM labour market has not kept pace with rapid industry growth.
Post-secondary institutions have an important role to play in meeting CRM labour market demand by creating robust degree programs which demonstrate that there are viable career pathways in archaeology outside of academia. But universities are simultaneously experiencing a significant decline in funding, and program opportunities are disappearing.
In part due to these challenges, students graduating from archeology and anthropology programs do not complete their degrees with the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in CRM. As a result, the burden of on-the-job training becomes high for employers.
There are some exceptions, such as CRM-specific undergraduate and graduate courses and programs at the Universities of Lethbridge and Calgary. However, the general lack of CRM-oriented programs at post-secondary institutions is particularly problematic given that the majority of graduates who stay in archeology will enter the CRM industry, and the overwhelming majority of archeology in Canada today is undertaken within a CRM context.
A path forward
Post-secondary curricula must extend beyond traditional academic programming to better prepare students for the workforce. To be clear, we are not arguing for creation of a CRM trade school for archeologists. Rather, we believe that small changes to curricula and programs can enhance student experience and career successes without compromising academic objectives and rigour.
Post-secondary institutions need to create degree programs that are aligned with the skills and knowledge used in industry and introduce CRM to students early in their undergraduate programs. Doing so will create more robust degree programs that attract students to a relevant education where they see a viable career path in archeology, meeting a market need.
This market need must be met to ensure timely assessment and regulatory approval of development projects, as the CRM workforce is needed to complete “nation-building” infrastructure projects. Archeology risks being seen as a barrier to development and may lose political and public backing if CRM processes are seen to slow or stall economic development.
If the CRM sector does not have the capacity to complete infrastructure assessments, current trends suggest that development will push ahead without archeological assessment or engagement. Archeological sites will almost certainly be destroyed in the process.
Critics will argue that it’s essential to cut red tape and speed up regulatory approval of economically important projects, making CRM a lesser part of the approvals process. We counter that CRM assessment is essential to development approvals, which are increasingly reliant on meaningful Indigenous engagement and Indigenous consent to proceed.
Wanton destruction of Indigenous archeological sites will only lead to further conflict and loss of heritage. Canada must protect that heritage and has a lot to gain from doing so. By protecting heritage, archeologists can help ensure better outcomes for all.
Lindsay Amundsen-Meyer receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Heritage Preservation Partnership Program (Arts, Culture and Status of Women).
Kenneth Roy Holyoke receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
Matthew Munro works for Stantec Consulting Ltd.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
