Geoarchaeology: driving heritage policy or sitting in the backseat? Traditions, politics and 'best practice' variation between states

Ireland has a culture of internationally-recognised expertise in archaeological science, and very high standards of practice in cultural resources management (CRM) archaeology. The Republic of Ireland is, however, one of several EU states with little research in geoarchaeology, and almost no CRM applications of this beyond geophysical survey. This is despite the state seeing the Celtic Tiger building boom in 1998-2007, with so much CRM work that archaeologists were imported from all over the EU, and despite the fact that neighbouring states have been applying geoarchaeological assessment as part of standard best practice in CRM for almost two decades. One of these states has produced freely-available online guidelines on geoarchaeology for CRM (e.g. English Heritage 2007), but there are still no guidelines for the application of geoarchaeological approaches beyond geophysical survey for Irish archaeology.. This study investigates the issue of variation in so-called ‘best practice’ in CRM archaeology, in particular trying to understand how geoarchaeology - except geophysical survey - was essentially omitted from Irish CRM practice. Through interviews with stakeholders in four US states, and comparing these with four EU ‘states’, I hope to better understand the traditions of practice and the politics of definition of my own field of expertise, and to develop a set of internationally-agreed expert fundamental guidelines to reduce local prejudices in scientific standards of practice.