Content uploaded by Kenneth Aitchison
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kenneth Aitchison on Jun 04, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Archaeological Review from Cambridge - 26.1 - 2011
The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave:
How the economic situation will aect archaeological
practice in universities and government
Kenneth Aitchison
Executive Director, Landward Resea rch Ltd
kenneth.aitchison@landward.eu
Introduction
In the autumn of , the eects of the late s global economic crisis
suddenly and seriously impacted commercial archaeological practice in
the United Kingdom. With per cent of all archaeological work in the
UK being developer-led, initiated through the planning process and de-
livered by companies competing on the open market (Aitchison a),
the sudden slowdown in small- and medium-scale development led to a
direct reduction in the amount of archaeological work being undertaken.
Previously, house prices in the UK had peaked in the summer of
(Aitchison a), and the early eects of the economic crisis—
then referred to as ‘the credit crunch’—had already led to a slowing of
archaeological work over the year that followed. Between and ,
new build housing completions decreased by per cent, from ,
“The credit crunch of 2007 became the nancial crash of
2008 and the recession of 2009” (Gam ble 200 9b).
80 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
to , (DCLG : ). The eects of September and October ,
however, were an order of magnitude more severe, with hundreds of ar-
chaeologists losing their jobs and several archaeological companies go-
ing out of business.
The cover letter that accompanied the request for data for the most
recent comprehensive archaeological labour market intelligence survey
(Aitchison and Edwards : ) was dated the very day— September
—that the run on Northern Rock began, one of the landmarks of the
start of the decline. The data was requested as it applied on August
, and so, this eectively means the data presented in that report were
gathered at the peak of the boom, at archaeology’s apogee.
Since then, The Institute for Archaeologists has gathered data on
the eects of the crisis on archaeological practice on a quarterly basis.
Signicant numbers of jobs were lost in late and early ; capi-
tal investment led to a certain level of recovery in the sector during the
summer of , but by the start of archaeological businesses still
remained uncertain about the future eects of the economic situation.
Outside the commercial sector, the number of people in archaeo-
logical employment providing advice to local government began to
decline, although not as sharply as in commercial archaeology; detailed
local government nance settlements are decided annually, but –
is the third year of a three-year overall settlement, after which serious cuts
are anticipated. Similarly, other agencies that are also primarily funded
from central government—the national heritage agencies and the uni-
versities—did not suer severe, immediate impacts, but these are also
anticipated in the period from –.
Schadla-Hall, Moshenka and Thornton () have written that the
archaeological sector has failed to secure socio-economic data that can
be used for eective lobbying against the threat of cuts. This article seeks
to briey review the information that has already been published re-
garding the eects of the crisis on commercial archaeology, and then to
81Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
concentrate on the areas of archaeological practice which have yet to be
seriously impacted upon but where adverse eects are expected in the
coming years. The dynamics of archaeological practice are already chang-
ing, and this paper will attempt to present informed foresight into how
this process will continue over the short- and medium-term.
Eects on archaeological contractors
By , commercial archaeology in the UK was operating in a crowded
marketplace. Whilst the market was not saturated, it was relatively small
with a high number of suppliers and little room for new entrants unless
existing providers dropped out. When the marketplace began to shrink,
the recession began to identify which businesses were commercially
strong and which were weak.
By January , commercial archaeology had suered a net loss
of approximately jobs (. per cent) from the August high
(Aitchison : ). There has been a certain amount of market restruc-
turing, with a small amount of ssioning (as individual members of sta
leave one rm to establish another) and signicantly more consolida-
tion, as larger companies take over smaller, less-successful but poten-
tially viable organisations. For example, Headland Archaeology absorbed
Archaeological Investigations and ARCUS became the Sheeld oce
of Wessex Archaeology (although some former ARCUS sta established
ArcHeritage, under the aegis of York Archaeological Trust).
Spending by the state aimed at alleviating the worst of the economic
crisis has provided some opportunities for archaeological employers,
through unemployment relief/avoidance measures such as the Future
Jobs Fund and more signicantly through participating in infrastructure
projects funded as capital expenditure. Late in , the UK government
announced that it would bring forward million in capital spending
for road and rail projects, and archaeology directly beneted from this
through the work that was carried out on the A in Nottinghamshire
(Aitchison d: –). Indeed, this one project contributed
82 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
signicantly to a temporary reversal of the job losses in the summer of
(Aitchison c).
However, overall, a small number of business failures and very few
new start-ups meant that the market was less crowded at the start of
than it was at the end of .
The second wave
The impact of the crisis on commercial archaeological practice is clear
and direct, but there are areas of archaeological practice which had yet
to be seriously impacted upon at the time of writing (in ) but where
adverse eects are expected in the coming years. This second wave of
the recession’s eects on archaeology will primarily impact sectors that
rely heavily on national funding sources, specically government services
(both local and national) and universities.
This is not yet the classic ‘double dip’ or ‘W-shaped’ recession, where
an immediate negative eect is fairly rapidly alleviated, then subsequent-
ly followed by a further crash when the policies that led to the recovery
are scaled back (Gamble a: ); however, in archaeology’s case the
sector may experience a ‘double dip’ following the end of the capital in-
vestment monies and the change of UK government in May . The
incoming government has focussed on addressing the decit through
reducing spending rather than Keynesian stimuli.
Eects on curators
Local government forms the lter through which archaeological practice
is mediated. Archaeological advisors to planning departments—
known as archaeological curators—make recommendations on what
archaeological work is required to inform the planners in the decision-
making process, and then on what archaeological work should be
undertaken as a condition of planning permission being granted.
This is not a statutory, legally protected service that local planning
authorities are obliged to provide, and with signicant funding cuts
83Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
anticipated over the next ve years, these archaeological services could
be under serious threat. If these ‘curatorial’ services are lost, there will also
be a second blow to commercial archaeology; if planners aren’t receiving
archaeological advice, they will not impose the conditions upon develop-
ment that necessitate eldwork being done.
The primary eects of the economic crisis to date on curatorial ser-
vices have been through the reduction in the amount of construction
work being undertaken, directly leading to a reduction in the number of
planning applications being scrutinised by local planning authority cu-
ratorial services. For instance, Swanson (in Aitchison and Swanson )
reported that the number of planning applications being seen by the
West of Scotland Archaeology Service (WoSAS), a joint service providing
advice to twelve local planning authorities, had been dropping since the
eects of the recessionary period began in . The number expected
to be scrutinised in the nal quarter of was expected to be half the
number seen in .
The situation reported at WoSAS has been replicated across the UK.
In England, there were , applications for planning permission in
the April to June quarter; by October to December , this had
fallen by per cent to ,, with the same number being reported a
year later in October to December (DCLG : ; DCLG ). The
Archaeological Investigations Project has long demonstrated the direct re-
lationship between the number of planning applications made and the
number of archaeological investigations undertaken, as measured by the
number of reports deposited (Darvill and Russell ). An overall reduc-
tion in the amount of archaeological work was already being reported by
(Aitchison a).
This has led to reduced incomes for local planning authorities,
as planning applications are supported by planning fees intended to
achieve cost recovery for the fee-paying element of their services—these
planning fees were frozen for a year in January to help support the
recovery of the construction sector (Construction News ).
84 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
As well as providing advisory services, a small number of local au-
thorities also undertake eldwork on a commercial basis, and these are
being doubly aected both by the downturn as it has aected commer-
cial archaeology in general and by the pressures on local government.
Exeter Archaeology was founded in , and is “potentially the old-
est archaeological contractor in the UK” (Exeter CC nd). It failed to meet
its break-even target for –, leading to a reduction in core sta,
and after the rst ve months of – it was clear that income
was well below target for that year (Exeter CC a, b). Following
discussions within the council on potential options for the unit, includ-
ing closure and outsourcing, the organisation restructured again with a
smaller core, down to sta by January (Exeter CC ).
The situation at Exeter Archaeology is likely to be repeated and ac-
centuated across the few remaining local government contractor ser-
vices, with all facing the same dilemma and most likely some (if not all)
having to reduce in size and potentially to close.
Following on from these immediate eects of the economic crisis
is the potentially far more serious fact that the current local government
funding settlement only extends to – (DCLG ), and so from
April councils will receive a dierent, and in most cases heavily re-
duced, nancial subvention from the state (DCLG c).
Cuts started to be made in local government early in (Morris,
O’Grady and Morris ; BBC a) and with Historic Environment
Records (HERs) being non-statutory services, it is impossible to see the
forthcoming cuts not directly leading to the loss of posts within these
services. Even before the implementation of the new settlement, the
number of sta working in HERs fell between and . The total
number only fell by around per cent, but this follows a period of sus-
tained growth in this sector (EH, ALGAO and IHBC ; Ingle ).
85Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
This may well mean that provision of advice and the maintenance of
records will be put under further pressure, and the provision of separate
HERs may be on borrowed time. While the actual record is important, it
does not necessarily have to be physically under the safekeeping of the
local authority—it is the interrogation of the record that is important, and
so the provision of advice remains key. Currently, several authorities do
not have in-house provision of advice; there are many examples of shared
services being provided jointly to several authorities. A private company
either maintains the record or provides advice to three local authorities in
Scotland, and for several years Northamptonshire was seen as ‘toxic’ as it
had no advisory service at all (ALGAO/FAME/IfA ).
On October , Nottinghamshire County Council announced
very signicant cuts to their conservation team, which includes the ar-
chaeological service and historic environment record, and budget (Notts
CC ) to save , over two years from – with a per cent
reduction in stang—from . FTE sta to only six. This is likely to be the
pattern followed by many other local authorities in the immediate future.
With local authority services being the key pivot upon which almost all
of primary archaeological work (and thus employment) depends, the im-
pact of all of this on the rest of archaeology is potentially enormous.
Eects on universities
Universities can also expect to face funding crises—like local government,
they are funded from several sources but primarily from central
government grants. As the government deals with the budget decit
that has been generated by the economic crisis, grant reductions are
inevitable and have already been set out in the announcement of the
HEFCE budget for – (HEFCE ).
Aitchison and Edwards (: ) estimated that individual ar-
chaeologists worked for universities, of which were working to pro-
vide education and academic services; of these individuals were iden-
tied as being “research-active” at the higher education institutions
which submitted to the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE ).
86 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
The anticipated future eects may be severe. From the summer of
, it was recognised that there was a strong chance of cuts to public
funding for universities, in the order of at least – per cent, which would
be very likely to lead to redundancies (Baty ; Hooley ).
Simultaneously, an alternative pressure provided by the changing
economic situation has seen the overall number of applications for uni-
versity places in – increasing by . per cent in comparison with
the previous year (UCAS a). Applications to study archaeology went
up, but not by as much as the aggregate gures—by . per cent (UCAS
b), leading to an increase in the number of students accepted on to
courses of . per cent (UCAS c). The numbers applying for places
continued to increase for the – intake by a further . per cent
(UCAS ).
By the end of , realities were becoming clear as the Department
for Business, Innovation and Skills announced a cut in its grant per stu-
dent to HEFCE—the “unit of resource” (Mandelson ). Mroz () es-
timated that, overall, higher education was facing cuts of million—
and that “the reality is that higher education seems set to take the biggest
cut of all in the public sector” (Mroz ). These cuts were conrmed
in February when HEFCE announced the provisional distribution of
funding to universities and colleges in – (HEFCE ), and once
the gures had been fully calculated and appreciated—a real term cut of
million (Harrison ) initial reaction was noisy but ineectual (Jack
).
There are potential further eects on funding, depending upon
where archaeology is placed for the forthcoming REF (Research Excellence
Framework—the replacement for the RAE), less might be allocated to the
subject. Previously it was placed with geography and architecture—if it
is placed with history and classics it is likely to lose out by being consid-
ered purely as a humanities subject rather than as part-STEM (science,
technology, engineering, mathematics) as many within the sector would
argue, having higher-cost eld and laboratory components. The Scottish
87Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
Funding Council has also investigated placing archaeology in band D—
its lowest funding band (Ralston ).
The immediate cuts, which can be aggregated up to an estimated
million by , are anticipated to aect stang most heavily. In
, two universities—Manchester and Sheeld—closed their in-house
commercial eld units (Aitchison b; Cumberpatch ). It has been
reported that GUARD (the commercial arm of the University of Glasgow’s
Department of Archaeology) was also under threat “because it is not
meeting targets set for all departments to generate income” (Denholm
a, b). In the rst week of October Birmingham Archaeology
(the commercial archaeological company within the University of
Birmingham) notied approximately members of sta—eectively,
the entire Birmingham Archaeology Heritage Services eldwork team—
that their posts were being made redundant, and inviting them to apply
for replacement posts (RESCUE ).
The commercial arms employ fewer individuals, on lower average
salaries, than the academic departments themselves, and so it will be
nancially easier for the universities to cut sta numbers here rst. But
given the scale of the impending cuts, it is very likely to aect academic
sta sooner rather than later—initially through natural wastage, as posts
opened up by retirement (which might be encouraged through oers
of voluntary severance, as happened at the University of Sheeld) are
not lled. The Department of Archaeological Science at the University of
Bradford has also reduced in size through retirements, with members of
sta accepting enhanced early severance packages and sta taking up
jobs elsewhere without these people being replaced (Ian Ralston pers.
comm. July ). In May the University of Bristol announced
proposals to cut four of the teaching posts within the Department of
Archaeology and Anthropology (Pitts ).
This will have knock-on eects on the rest of the profession.
While academic archaeology is a relatively small part of the sector as a
whole— per cent of all archaeologists work for universities, two thirds
88 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
of them providing education and academic research services (Aitchison
and Edwards : )—given that eectively all the new entrants into
professional archaeology in the last two decades have been graduates,
reduced university resources might shape the kind of supply that the rest
of the profession receives.
Eects on national heritage agencies
Changes at the national heritage agencies—English Heritage, Historic
Scotland, Cadw and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency—will
be driven by more than just economic factors. First and foremost, as
agencies of central or devolved government, they will be impacted on
by the eorts of the government to address the economic decit. Bigger
politics—particularly outside England, where heritage is often heavily
associated with particular identity agendas—will also come into play.
English Heritage receives approximately three-quarters of its fund-
ing from the Treasury to carry out its statutory role as the Government’s
adviser on the historic environment in England. The current Funding
Agreement covers the three-year period April – March (EH
b). The current Historic Scotland Corporate Plan also extends from
– (HS ).
None of the three principal UK political parties’ general elec-
tion manifestos made mention of archaeology, although all did refer to
heritage if not the historic environment (Heritage Alliance ). One
potentially very signicant policy—which didn’t make it to inclusion in
a manifesto—was contained within a Liberal Democrat document pub-
lished in September identifying target areas for budget cuts, the
Liberal Democrats “identied at least quangos that should be culled
or merged”, including English Heritage which would be merged with
the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) (Liberal Democrat Party : ). The
diering geographical remits of English Heritage (England) and the HLF
(UK-wide) notwithstanding, the economic situation that the post-
decit has brought into being highlights the temptation to politicians
who are faced with dicult decisions to cut at relatively easy targets, and
89Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
state-funded heritage agencies are on that list. Speaking in February ,
the then Conservative Shadow Minister for Culture, Ed Vaizey, appeared
to have a better grip on the roles of those two organisations but made it
very clear that his party planned changes for them both, and pointedly
emphasised that “we need to have a debate about the work and role of
English Heritage” (Action Planning : ).
This merger was identied in list of proposed changes leaked to
the Daily Telegraph in September (Porter ), but when the
Government formally announced which quangos would be cut or con-
solidated on October , there were no major consolidations of heri-
tage bodies. However, DCMS “asked English Heritage and the Heritage
Lottery Fund, as a matter of urgency, to identify and reduce any overlap
of activities” (DCMS ).
Prior to the elections to the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish
National Party (which subsequently formed a minority administration)
made a manifesto commitment to “reduce duplication” by merging
Historic Scotland and the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical
Monuments of Scotland (SNP : ). Subsequently, this did not come
to pass, but the issue was touched upon again in the Reid strategic re-
view of the National Trust for Scotland (NTS ) which recognised that
there are several agencies working in the eld of heritage in Scotland,
and while calling for more collaboration rejects the suggestion that the
NTS should merge with Historic Scotland.
With in-house stang a major part of the budgets of each of these
agencies, cuts or ‘eciency savings’ are very likely to impact on sta num-
bers. In the rst instance, this can initially be expected to be addressed
through ‘natural wastage’, as posts that fall vacant are not then lled.
There is a sense that this is already happening at both Historic Scotland
and English Heritage in particular, in the latter case because a signicant
level of sta unhappiness has been created by the relocation of many
posts from London to Swindon (English Heritage : ). In Northern
Ireland, the comparatively small historic environment team within the NI
90 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
Environment Agency may prove to be particularly vulnerable, as there
will be so little room for manoeuvre if sta cuts have to be made.
As employers, national heritage agencies are very denitely not in-
vulnerable to funding reductions and, as made clear by Leighton (:
), political parties try to be seen to protect ‘high priority’ services such as
health and education, which is likely to mean that “heritage is low priority
and will be cut…jobs are particularly at risk given the high proportion of
[DCMS] grants [to heritage bodies] spent on salaries”.
Jeremy Hunt, the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and
Sport told BBC’s Newsnight on May that “none of the Department
for Culture Media and Sport’s budgets are protected” and if the required
cuts were spread evenly between all government departments, his would
have to nd million of savings (BBC b).
Following an announcement by David Laws, Chief Secretary to the
Treasury on May (HM Treasury ), English Heritage had to im-
mediately identify million savings from their – budget. Simon
Thurley, the EH Chief Executive, claimed to have anticipated and planned
for these cuts (English Heritage ), which led to an immediate halt to
recruitment to several EH training projects and the closure of their Future
Jobs Fund project. In addition to this, the plans for a Stonehenge Visitor
Centre have been put into abeyance (BBC News Wiltshire ).
When further cuts were announced following the Comprehensive
Spending Review on October , English Heritage’s grant from the
Government for the four years from – was reduced from the
– levels by per cent (EH b). This led to an announcement
from English Heritage on October that this would lead to a one-
third reduction of grants given, and the loss of at least jobs (EH c)
from a workforce of in –.
91Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
Conclusions
With the May UK coalition government rmly wedded to reducing the
decit through spending cuts (Conservative Party and Liberal Democrat
Party ), many of the potential impacts on archaeological practice
envisioned above now seem very likely to come to pass. However, further
political developments may yet alleviate the situation.
Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment
(DCLG ) was published and adopted as government policy on
March . This document replaced PPG (DoE ) as the basic text
for how archaeological remains have to be treated in the planning pro-
cess in England—reconrming that it is the responsibility of potential de-
velopers to fully inform local planning authorities with all of the informa-
tion the LPA needs to decide on whether or not planning permission will
be granted, and if so, with what conditions attached. The fundamental
place of archaeology as an element to be considered within the sustain-
able development process seems secure.
Had the Heritage Protection Bill reached the statute book—it was
dropped from the Queen’s Speech on two occasions, in December
and July (Fulcher ), as the economic crisis sidelined this pro-
posed legislation—the position of the local planning authorities advisers
could have been much more certain. At present, they remain non-stat-
utory services. However, in the run-up to the General Election, the
Conservative Party (from the comfortable vantage point of opposition)
were able to say that they would bring this Bill back in the rst Parliament
if they were elected (Action Planning : –).
One opportunity to secure this advice (in Scotland) might be
through the Histo ric Environment (Am endment) (Scotland) Bil l 2010 (Scottish
Parliament ). As introduced to the Scottish Parliament on May
the Bill makes no mention of statutory requirement for local authorities to
have access to archaeological advice within the planning process, but this
may potentially be introduced through amendments in debate.
92 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
The political opportunities that exist all rely on the vicissitudes of co-
alition or minority governments reaching agreement on issues that may
not hold politicians’ attention as easily as the stark realities of job losses and
tax rises. Forecasting is a risky business; in , at a time when there were
only people earning a living from archaeology in the whole country
(Thomas ), Chris Musson wrote that “it is dicult to imagine the inde-
pendent consultancy becoming a major force within British archaeology”
(Musson : ). Within thirty years, there were more than thirty times
as many professional archaeologists, and it was the private sector that
boomed with the public sector having to expand to keep up.Commercial
archaeology has been an economic canary—one of the rst sectors to
suer the impacts of the recession—and it has not yet recovered from
the economic downturn. Non-commercial, government-funded archae-
ology is only just beginning to suer directly from the changed economic
conditions, but extensive and severe impacts are imminent and what the
ultimate results of this will be cannot be condently predicted.
References
Action Planning. . Funding the Future 2010. Website: http://mxm.mxmfb.com/rsps/ct/
c//r//l/, accessed on May .
Aitchison, K. a. Archaeology and the global nancial crisis. Antiquity (). Website:
http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/aitchison, accessed on March .
Aitchison, K. b. Archaeology is changing—forever. British Archaeology July/August
: – .
Aitchison, K. c. Job Losses in Archaeology—July . Report for the Institute for Ar-
chaeologists and the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers. Website:
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/inPages/docs/JobLossesJuly.
pdf, accessed on May .
Aitchison, K.d. After the ‘gold rush’: Global archaeology in . World Archaeology
(): –.
Aitchison, K. . Job Losses in Archaeology—January . Report for the Institute for
Archaeologists and the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers. Web-
site: http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/inPages/docs/JobLosses-
January.pdf, accessed on May .
93Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
Aitchison, K. and Edwards, R. . Archaeology labour market intelligence: Proling the
profession –. Institute for Archaeologists. Website: http://www.archaeolo-
gists.net/modules/icontent/inPages/docs/lmi/Archaeology_LMI_re-
port_colour.pdf, accessed on December .
Aitchison, K. and Swanson, C. . Scottish Group IfA AGM and recession seminar. The
Archaeologist : .
ALGAO/FAME/IfA (Association of Local Government Archaeology Ocers / Federation of
Archaeological Managers and Employers / Institute for Archaeologists). .
Working together in the recession: Notes of ALGAO England/FAME/IfA meeting,
Monday, March . Website: http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icon-
tent/inPages/docs/ALGAOFAMEIfA--.pdf, accessed on February .
BBC. a. Nottin ghamshire council plan threatens , jobs. BBC News. Website: http://
news.bbc.co.uk//hi/england/nottinghamshire/.stm, accessed on Febru-
ary .
BBC. b. London Olympics not protected from budget cuts. BBC News. Website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk//hi/england/london/.stm, accessed on May
.
BB C N ews Wilt shir e. . Government funding for Stonehenge visitor centre axed. BBC News
Wiltshire. Website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/, a ccess ed on July .
Conservative Party and Liberal Democrat Party. . Conservative Liberal Democrat co-
alition negotiations. Agreements reached May . Website: http://www.con-
servatives.com/~/media/Files/DownloadableFiles/agreement.ashx?dl=true,
accessed on May .
Construction News. . Planning fees frozen for months. Construction News Janu-
ary . Website: http://www.cnplus.co.uk/sectors/housing/planning-fees-fro-
zen-for--months/.article, accessed on May .
Cumberpatch, C.G. . The end of eld archaeology in universities? Rescue News : .
Darvill, T. and Russell, B. . Archaeology after PPG: Archaeological investigations in
England –. Bournemouth University School of Conservation Sciences Research
Report .
DCLG (Department of Communities and Local Government). . Fair and aordable
funding to keep down Council Tax. Website: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.
gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/, accessed on
February .
94 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
DCLG. . Housing and Planning Statistics . Website: http://www.communities.
gov.uk/documents/statistics/pdf/.pdf, accessed on May .
DCLG. a. Planning Applications: December Quarter (England). Website: http://
www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/statistics/planningapplication-
sq, accessed on May .
DCLG. b. Planning Policy Statement : Planning for the Historic Environment. Lon-
don: The Stationery Oce. Website: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/
planningandbuilding/pdf/.pdf, accessed on March .
DCLG. c. Formula Grant from - and Statutory Notice of Data Collection. Web-
site: http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/nance//augdatlet.pdf, accessed
on October .
DCMS (Department for Culture, Media and Sport). . Improving eciency and trans-
parency: DCMS cuts quangos. Website: http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/media_
releases/.aspx, accessed on October .
Denholm, A. a. Academics face axe as university looks to cut costs. The Herald. Web-
site: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/education/academics-face-axe-as-uni-
versity-looks-to-cut-costs-. accessed April , accessed on April
.
Denholm, A. b. Axe threatened uni service given reprieve. Evening Times. Website:
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/axe-threatened-uni-service-given-re-
prieve-., accessed on April .
DoE (Department of the Environment). . Planning Policy Guidance: Archaeology and
Planning. London: HMSO.
EH (English Heritage). a. Annual Report and Accounts /. Website: http://www.
english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/Annual_Report_and_Accounts_.
pdf?, accessed on March .
EH. b. English Heritage Funding Agreement /–/. Website: http://www.
english-heritage.org.uk/upload/doc/English_Heritage_Funding_Agree-
ment_-.doc?, accessed on May .
EH. a. Chief Executive welcomes conservation of Chapter House. Website: http://
www.english-heritage.org.uk/about/news/eh-chief-executive-welcomes-chap-
ter-house-conservation/, accessed February .
EH. b. Statement in response to CSR from Baroness Andrews OBE Chair of English
Heritage. Website: http://relaunch.english-heritage.org.uk/about/news/eh-re-
sponds/Public-sector-cuts/, accessed on October .
95Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
EH. c. Public sector cuts. Website: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/about/news/
eh-responds/Public-sector-cuts/, accessed on November .
EH, ALGAO and IHBC (English Heritage, the Association of Local Government Archaeo-
logical Ocers and the Institute of Historic Building Conservation). . Imple-
menting the Heritage Protection Reforms: A Report on Local Authority and English
Heritage sta resources. Website: http://www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/Imple-
menting_HPR_-_ Sta_Resources_ .pdf?, accessed on
May .
Exeter City Council (Exeter CC). nd. Exeter Archaeology. http://www.exeter.gov.uk/index.
aspx?articleid=, accessed on February .
Exeter CC a. Archaeological Advisory Committee, Thursday th September
agenda and minutes. Website: http://committees.exeter.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.
aspx?CId=&MID=, accessed on February .
Exeter CC b. Executive, Tuesday th September . Website: http://committees.
exeter.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=&MID=AI, accessed on
February .
Exeter CC. . Meeting of Archaeological Advisory Committee, Thursday th January
. pm (Item ). Website: http://committees.exeter.gov.uk/mgAi.
aspx?ID=, accessed on February .
Fulcher, M. . Heritage Protection Bill lef t out—again. The Architects’ Journal. Website:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/heritage-protection-bill-left-out-
again/.article, accessed on March .
Gamble, A. a. Th e Spectre at the Feast: Capitalist Crisis and the Politics of Recession. Bas-
ingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gamble, A. b. Review of Reinhart, C.M and Rogo, K. S. This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries
of Financial Folly. New Statesman December . Website: http://www.newstates-
man.com/print/, accessed on January .
Harrison, A. Universities facing ‘rst budget cuts in years’. BBC News. Website: http://
news.bbc.co.uk//hi/education/.stm, accessed on March .
HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England). . HEFCE announces funding
for universities and colleges in -. Website: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/he-
fce//grant/, accessed on February
Heritage Alliance. . General Election . The Heritage Alliance analysis of main Par-
ty manifestos. Website: http://www.heritagelink.org.uk/wp/wp-content/up-
loads///Manifestos-THA-analysis-.pdf, accessed on May .
96 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
HM Treasury. . Speech by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Rt Hon David Laws MP,
announcing . billion savings. Website: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/
press__.htm, accessed on July .
HS (Historic Scotland). . Historic Scotland Corporate Plan –. Website: http://
www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/corporate-plan--.pdf, accessed on May
.
Ingle, C. . ALGAO Stang and Casework survey 2006: Preliminary analysis of gures
from members in England. Unpublished internal ALGAO report.
Jack, M. . University of Sussex cutbacks: Protests, riot police and strike action. The In-
dependent. Website: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/
news/university-of-sussex-cutbacks-protests-riot-police-and-strike-ac-
tion-.html, accessed on March .
Leighton, A. . “Cuts…and more to come!”, Prospects for Heritage.. February .
(brieng for Prospect members working in the heritage sector).
Liberal Democrat Party. . A Better Politics for Less. Website: http://www.libdem-
voice.org/wp-content/uploads///A-better-politics-for-less.pdf, accessed on
March .
Mandelson, P. . Higher Education Funding -–. Website: http://www.bis.gov.
uk/higher-education-funding--, accessed on January .
Morris, N., O’Grady, S. and Morris, S. . Cash crisis hits town halls from Truro to Aber-
deen: Councils warn , workers will face redundancy this spring. The Indepen-
dent. Website: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cash-crisis-
hits-town-halls-from-truro-to-aberdeen-.html, accessed on February
.
Mroz, A. . Leader: get used to life on the edge..Times Higher Education. Website:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=, accessed
on January .
Musson, C. . Digging all the time. In Rahtz, P.A. (ed.), Rescue Archaeology. Harmond-
sworth: Penguin, –.
Notts CC (Nottinghamshire County Council). . Summary Proposal. Service Area—
Conservation: Restructure of Services. Website: http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.
uk/EasySiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=&type=full&servicetype=Attach
ment, accessed on October .
NTS (National Trust for Scotland). . Fit for Purpose: Report of the Strategic Review of
the National Trust for Scotland. Website: http://www.nts.org.uk /about/downloads/
review/t_for_purpose.pdf, accessed on October .
97Kenneth Aitchison
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
Pitts, M. . Archaeology at Bristol University threatened? British Archaeology July/Au-
gust : .
Porter, A. . Quango cuts: bodies to be scrapped under coalition plans. Daily Tele-
graph. Website: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics//
Quango-cuts--bodies-to-be-scrapped-under-coalition-plans.html, accessed on
September .
RAE (Research Assessment Exercise). . Panel H: Archaeology. RAE 2008 Subject
Overview. Website: http://www.rae.ac.uk/pubs//ov/MainPanelH.zip, accessed
on May .
Ralston, I. . Archaeology in the Scottish Universities. Presentation made to Scottish
Group of the Institute for Archaeologists’ AGM, October .
RESCUE. . Redundancies at Birmingham Archaeology. Website: http://www.rescue-
archaeology.org.uk/beta////redundancies-at-birmingham-archaeology/,
accessed on November .
Schadla-Hall, T., Moshenka, G. and Thornton, A. . Editorial. Public Archaeology ():
.
Scottish Parliament. . Historic Environment (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill . Web-
site: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s/bills/-HistoricEnvironment/bs-in-
trod-pm.pdf, accessed on May .
SNP (Scottish National Party). . Manifesto . Website: http://www.snp.org/sys-
tem/les/manifesto+programme.pdf, accessed on May
Thomas, C. . Archaeology in Britain . In Rahtz, P.A. (ed.), Rescue Archaeology. Har-
mondsworth: Penguin, –.
UCAS (Universities and Colleges Admissions Service). a. Applications and Accep-
tances by Subject. Website: http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/stat_services/stats_
online/data_tables/subject/, accessed on December .
UCAS. b. Latest university application gures show . rise. Press release July
. Website: http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/media_enquiries/media_releas-
es//--, accessed on December .
UCAS. c. Provisional nal gures for . press release October . Website:
http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/media_enquiries/media_releas-
es//--, accessed on December .
98 The Economic Crisis and the Coming Second Wave
Archaeol ogical Re view from C ambridg e 26.1: 79–98
UCAS. . Application numbers hit record highs for the fourth year running. Website:
http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/media_enquiries/media_releases//,
accessed on April .