Return Ticket to Sofia - Spatial Planning, Sustainable Development and Archaeology*

by John Williams and Gerhard Ermischer

At the annual Conference of the EAA in Thessaloniki 2002 the round table Session on Archaeological Legislation and Organisation in Europe discussed the various Instruments for managing the archaeological heritage across Europe, including the conventions of the Council of Europe (CoE) relating to the historic environment and also the provisions for the historic environment within the spatial planning System. There was general support for archaeologists involving themselves in all these processes and making sure that their voice and the voice of archaeology was heard. The members of the round table proposed that the EAA should participate, where possible, in the various initiatives, so as to strengthen the role of the cultural heritage in general and archaeology more specifically. It is important for archaeologists not to work in isolation but to establish links with the wider world, at a local, regional, national and international level, both in terms of the subject matter itself and in relation to wider agendas.

Only a few weeks after the EAA Conference in Thessaloniki, an international seminar took place in Sofia, Bulgaria, on 23^rd-24^m October 2002, within the framework of the activities of the European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning of the member States of the Council of Europe (CEMAT-CoE). The seminar was jointly organised by the Council of Europe and the Bulgarian government and looked at Spatial Planning for the Sustainable Development of Particular Types of European Areas: Mountains, Coastal Zones, Rural Zones, Flood-Plains and Alluvial Valleys. The theme picked up the Guiding Principles for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent (GPSSDEC-CEMAT) adopted by the European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning at their meeting in Manöver in September 2000. The authors attended the Conference on behalf of the EAA, which has recently been granted NGO (non-governmental Organisation) Status.

"The 'Guiding Principles' take into account, in accordance with the concept of sustainability, the needs of all the inhabitant of Europe's regions, without compromising the fundamental rights and development prospects of Mure generations. They aim in particular at bringing the economic and social requirements to be met by the territory into harmony with its ecological and cultural functions and therefore contributing to long-term, large-scale and balanced spatial development." One of the ten principles proposed for sustainable development in Europe deals with 'enhancing the cultural heritage as a factor for development'. Spatial development policy is seen as a component of integrated management for protecting and conserving the heritage which is itself seen as contributing to economic development and to strengthening regional identity.

The 'Guiding Principles' also recognise that beyond the general principles for sustainable development policy there is a need for more detailed spatial development measures for European cultural landscapes as well as for dealing with the variety of Europe's regions: urban and rural areas, mountains, coastal and island regions, flood plains, and so on. The Sofia Conference examined in particular the issues for mountains, coastal zones, rural zones, flood-plains and alluvial valleys. There were four major sessions:

• spatial planning and sustainable development
• examples of good practice
• instruments for implementation
• possibilities of a transfrontier, transnational and interregional co-operation

These sessions were followed by a closing round-table looking at innovative and integrated approaches to territorial development.

The seminar was attended by representatives of thirty-two of the forty-four states of the Council of Europe. As might be expected with an organisation stretching from Iceland to the Ukraine and from Norway to Malta there are variations in emphasis in respect of the three focuses of sustainability (economic, sodal and environmental), reflecting the different backgrounds of the respective countries and regional priorities. It could be noted that, while the historic environment was discussed, the natural environment figured more prominently and there was always some tension between conserving the resource and ensuring viable economic futures.

From the perspective of the historic environment the opening address of Enrico Buergi (Switzerland), Chair of the Conference on the European Landscape Convention, was important. In it he stressed the importance of the landscape as a living entity, a natural environment, a space fashioned by man, an economic zone, a place for discovery, a key to regional and local identity and a witness of the history of the earth. He then proceeded to look at the European Landscape Convention and its operation, emphasising the pivotal role of spatial planning in its implementation. Hario Principe (Italy) then looked at some examples of landscape on the west coast of Italy, relating present landscapes to historical maps of the last three centuries. More could have been said here about the preceding centuries and about the landscape itself as a document of human history.

In turning to examples of good practice, while the historic environment was mentioned, particularly in relation to the built heritage, it was the natural environment which took a more central role, both in respect of river Systems and mountains. Underlying all, however, were the economic and social issues facing more remote zones.

In the session on instruments for implementation, funding and participation in decision making were key themes, but it was also interesting to see the integrated GIS System for specially protected areas in Turkey where archaeological sites form a separate layer. This provided a useful reminder of the historic dimension of the landscape.

The fourth session provided a fascinating overview of transnational co-operative projects in the Carpathians, the Danube basin and the Danube delta and underlined the value of partnership.

In summing up, Dusan Blaganje (Slovenia) emphasised the importance of the European Landscape convention but noted that spatial planning policy generally is only of value if it is feasible and can be and is implemented. In order to take things forward sound interdisciplinary approaches are essential.

It is interesting to reflect on the seminar and indeed more widely. The Council of Europe, while it is geographically more extensive than the European Union, does not have the same political status, but, nonetheless, it is important in drawing together representatives from across Europe in its widest sense to look for European solutions. As a result of its work we have seen major advances in European approaches to the protection of the cultural heritage in the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe (Granada 1985), the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (revised) (Valetta 1992) and latterly the European Landscape Convention (Florence 2000). These conventions are legally binding for the countries that ratify them.

To date thirty-five states have ratified the Granada Convention (Andorra, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Macedonia, Turkey, and the United Kingdom and also Yugoslavia, which is not a member of the Council of Europe).

Twenty-seven states have ratified the Valetta Convention (Andorra, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, and also the Holy See and Monaco, which are not members of the Council of Europe) and thirteen states have signed but not yet ratified it (Armenia, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Russia, San Marino, Spain, and the Ukraine). This latter group interestingly includes countries where the principles of Valetta are very much being applied already.

Twenty-four states have signed the Florence Convention (Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey) and Ireland, Lithuania, Moldova, Norway and Romania have already approved or ratified it.

The Valetta Convention which deals specifically with archaeology is well known to members of EAA but the European Landscape Convention, the latest of these conventions and the one most referred to at Sofia, is also of great interest to archaeologists, for whom the cultural landscape has become a major subject of research. Indeed there is also recognition that the management of the landscape should be based on an informed understanding of the historical processes which have formed it. It became clear, however, during the CEMAT seminar that many landscape planners, landscape architects or ecologists have difficulties in seeing the landscape as the result of a long process of change, very much influenced by man. Archaeologists have the expertise to contribute constructively to the debate about landscape management.

The 'Guiding Principles', unlike the conventions, are rather recommendations of the Committee of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning in the same way that the European Spatial Development Perspective (Potsdam 1999) is a legally non-binding policy framework for better co-operation between member states of the European Union. Nonetheless these planning guidelines are both powerful instruments, which underpin policy thinking and initiatives, and the ESDP has certainly fed into the development of European Regional Development Fund programmes such as Interreg. It is interesting to note that in Interreg III the European Union is to contribute six million Euro to a study on spatial planning in Europe which will pursue the work set out in the ESDP with a view to contributing to the debate on regional policy after 2006.

There is an important message here for EAA and archaeologists in general. If we are to ensure that archaeology, and the historic environment more generally, are to receive the attention and protection which we think they deserve, we must relate them to current mainstream policy thinking in terms of sustainability, rather than merely indulge ourselves in an academic pursuit, expecting all, unquestioningly, to hold the same values as ourselves. After all, what is going to drive national, European and global agendas over the foreseeable future is the quest for prosperity tempered by the principles of sustainability - economic and social as well as environmental. The historic environment certainly has a value in itself, and we need to promote it, but we must also make our values relevant to modern world agendas.

The seminar and the work of CEMAT is important in facilitating discussion on key issues relating to sustainability and spatial planning. EAA as one of some 400 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) granted consultative Status by the Council of Europe has access to debate and hopefully can influence policy directions affecting its area of influence. Indeed those concerned with the historic environment need to be working not just with other environmental specialists but with those who will be helping to shape the spatial planning vision of Europe over the next twenty years or so.

John Williams is Head of Heritage Conservation at Kent County Council and leads the Planarch partnership which has sought to develops links between archaeology and spatial planning in the Interreg North-Western Europe area. Gerhard Ermischer is curator and city archaeologist at the City Museums Aschaffenburg and chairs the Archaeological Spessart-Project and the EU funded European network Pathways to Cultural Landscapes. Both represented the European Association of Archaeologists at Sofia.

*Article published in "The European Archaeologist" 18 / 2002, page 7-9.

Context

Programme

Impressions