Learning from Loss: Eroding Coastal Heritage in Scotland

Abstract

Abstract:Heritage sites are constantly changing due to natural processes, and this change can happen fastest at the coast. Much legislation has been enacted to protect sites of historic interest, but these do not protect sites from natural processes. Change is already happening, and climate change predictions suggest that the pace will accelerate in the future. Instead of seeing the potential destruction of heritage sites as a disaster, we should embrace the opportunity that they can provide for us to learn about the past and to plan for the future. Heritage laws often enshrine a policy of preservation in situ, meaning that our most spectacular sites are preserved in a state of equilibrium, with a default position of no permitted intervention. However, the options for threatened coastal sites mirror those of shoreline management plans, which usually recommend either the construction of a coastal defence or, more likely, a strategy of managed retreat, where erosion is allowed to take its course after appropriate mitigations strategies have been enacted. Managed retreat can lead to a range of research projects, some of which would not normally be possible at similar, unthreatened and legally protected monuments. Such research also has the potential to involve members of the public, who can help in the discovery process, and cascade what they have learned through their communities. Information shared can be about the heritage site itself, including how communities in the past coped at times of climatic stress; and also about the processes that are now threatening the monument, thus helping teach about present day climate change.

Going for the win‐win: including the public in underwater cultural heritage management through citizen science in Australia and New Zealand

“…Since the mid 1990s the term ‘citizen science’ has been used to describe research conducted by non‐professionals, entering the Oxford dictionary in 2014 (Strasser et al ., 2019: 53–54). On a global basis Scotland has been in the forefront of community engagement with two coastal‐focused public archaeology programmes: the Scottish Coastal Archaeology and the Problem of Erosion (SCAPE) and Scotland's Coastal Heritage at Risk Project (SCHARP) (Dawson, 2003: 2016; Dawson et al ., 2017; Graham et al ., 2017; Hambly, 2018). England and the United States’ Florida Public Archaeology Network (FPAN), have also led in UCH community engagement.…”

Fish- and Shellmiddens from Galicia (Northwest Spain): Reflections upon a Neglected Coastal Cultural Heritage from the Iberian Peninsula

“…These initiatives allow the categorizing of sites according to their vulnerability and have led, or eventually will lead, to a call for policy awareness and the development of specific management procedures. These success stories prove the need to increase the degree of involvement of different institutions now that an acceleration of the destructive coastal processes appears to be taking place (e.g., Graham et al 2017).…”

Historic preservation priorities for climate adaptation

“…Although policy is typically written to enable flexibility, details are lacking for prioritization when diverse heritage are equally vulnerable and equally significant, are highly vulnerable but of low significance, or have low vulnerability but are of high significance. As such, researchers are beginning to address this issue by developing measurement frameworks (Fatori� c and Seekamp, 2018), risk analysis frameworks (Carmichael et al, 2018), citizen science projects to identify and monitor cultural heritage (Graham, Hambly and Dawson 2017) and optimization models for climate adaptation planning (Xiao et al, 2019). Though relevant and important for informing management decisions, these approaches often require extensive data gathering, which may not be time sensitive to coastal adaptation decision-making that occurs when funding is available.…”