58
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Back to the front: Archaeological resources and the planning process

ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 189-200 | Received 19 Sep 2019, Accepted 28 Oct 2019, Published online: 19 Nov 2019
 

ABSTRACT

While there are standardized methods for incorporating natural resources into planning and design, cultural resources are treated as an afterthought or are considered only after unexpected discoveries or policies require procedural review. Bringing cultural resources to the front end of planning will have positive effects not only on the preservation of those resources, but on planning and design processes. However, to work toward this shift in practice it is necessary to evaluate the types of data useful for planning professionals, which in most cases are evaluative spatial data commonly contained in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) databases. In the United States, statewide cultural resource GIS databases are required in State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO). While universal, these databases vary in the terminologies used and the types of data recorded, necessitating a move toward standardization and broadened utility. Detailed evaluations of statewide cultural resource GIS databases provide insight into what needs standardization and how to move toward that goal. By moving toward standardization it is possible to bring cultural resources to the front end of the planning and design process. In turn, this will increase cultural resource preservation levels while decreasing the costs of project implementation by reducing the need to revisit project designs after they are put in place.

Acknowledgments

This work was made possible by the support of the National Park Service, the Wildlife Management Institute, and the Appalachian Landscape Conservation Cooperative. We also thank the staff of the Florida Master Site File and Pennsylvania Historic Museum Commission, who provided access to the cultural resource GIS databases used in this analysis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Park Service [P0059082]; National Park Service [135414 P11AC30805]; National Park Service [PRO00015347]; National Center for Preservation Education [1212]; Wildlife Management Institute [APPLCC2015-1]; Wildlife Management Institute [APPLCC2016-1].

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access
  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 61.00 Add to cart
* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.