DOI: 10.17026/dans-x7v-7rqb
title: North Sea Prehistory Research and Management Framework (NSPRMF) 2019
title: Retuning the research and management agenda for prehistoric landscapes and archaeology in the Dutch sector of the continental shelf

description: &lt;p&gt;The North Sea Prehistory Research and Management Framework (NSPRMF) 2009 set out to provide an agenda for the research and heritage management of submerged archaeological sites and relict landscapes in the Dutch-Belgian and British parts of the southern North Sea. The framework first and foremost focussed on: (1) maximisation of archaeological information arising from offshore developments (spatial, economic); (2) stimulation of the study of archaeologically relevant materials and deposits to broaden the knowledge base for archaeological and management purposes; (3) stimulation of public understanding and awareness of the past, and fostering of a shared sense of responsibility among developers, decision makers, and scientists; (4) development of a firm basis for heritage management judgement, consultancy, and decision-making, notably an internationally recognised and scientifically accepted set of resource assessments and research agenda. In view of the vast body of work that has been carried out since the production of the NSPRMF 2009 and the ongoing developments in and around the Dutch sector of the continental shelf, and in order to set a fresh baseline for management purposes for the coming years, the cultural heritage agency of the Netherlands has requested a synthesis and evaluation of published material and other spin-offs in the context of the initial aims of this framework. The present report provides the outcome of this analysis. It is structured into three parts: a look back at the NSPRMF 2009 (chapter 2), an evaluation of the current state of affairs in relation to the priorities set in the NSPRMF 2009 (chapters 3 and 4), and a look forward to opportunities, dilemmas, and choices, in order to retune or redefine priorities and present possible strategies applicable to the Dutch sector of the North Sea for the coming years (chapter 5).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Over the past 10 years, a lot of research has been conducted, in various forms, that is of relevance to the research priorities of the NSPRMF 2009. The extent to which these priorities are met is variable. Efforts have been geared towards gaining a better understanding of geological factors affecting the taphonomic histories of submerged prehistoric landscapes, as well as those of archaeological and palaeontological finds. Various studies have provided insight into sea-level fluctuation and changing palaeogeography, factors that are of direct archaeological relevance for our understanding of prehistoric human–environment interrelationships and socio-cultural processes. As yet, the collection of good data points appears to lag behind. Significant results have been obtained with respect to underwater investigation of sites (Rotterdam-Yangtzehaven), the geological contextualisation of finds with limited context information (Middeldiep, Rotterdam-Maasvlakte 2), as well as systematic inventorying and scientific analysis (AMS 14C dating, stable isotope analysis) of stray or chance finds. The number of new good data points collected over the past decade is, however, limited. To increase the number of good observations (data points), prospection techniques need to be further developed. The staged approach (geoarchaeological assessment, archaeological sampling, excavation) implemented at Rotterdam-Yangtzehaven was successful, and showed what can be achieved under particular circumstances and within a particular project context. However, in view of the variability in archaeological manifestations of prehistoric behaviour known from the North Sea, as well as the variable character and impacts of economic developments on the seabed, other prospection techniques (including destructive ones) need to be considered and developed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;With respect to the NSPRMF 2009 management agenda, a range of initiatives has been taken. Some initiatives have permitted steps forward, whereas others have made it clear that much remains to be done in order to firmly anchor archaeological interests concerning submerged prehistoric archaeology and landscapes in heritage management policies – and in order to develop regulations as well as strategies. Collaboration with industry and private collectors has been variably successful. In the context of the Rotterdam-Maasvlakte 2 harbour extension, efforts have led to a strategy that was beneficial for both the scientific community and the economic stakeholders, which involved finding solutions for research opportunities within a highly complex project. Within the same setting, activities focussed on public outreach spurred collaboration among the developer, scientists, and private collectors. This triggered further initiatives aimed at structural collaboration between scientists and private collectors and the recording of finds. The case study of the Area 240 Palaeolithic hand-axes, as well as that of the Middeldiep Neanderthal skull fragment, however, show that collaboration with industry can easily become disrupted due to conflicting interests. The systematic recording of finds made by private as well as professional collectors forms an important basis for data sharing. The SPLASHCOS-viewer, which provides basic information about the location and nature of archaeological and palaeontological finds, forms a platform that permits further data sharing. Importantly, the SPLASHCOS-viewer database has been integrated into the EMODnet gateway, thereby making prehistoric cultural heritage a relevant aspect of the marine environment that is made available to a wide array of stakeholders. Increasing data availability is highly relevant and desirable for the assessment of research potential and threats. Initiatives have been taken to model potential for the presence of prehistoric archaeological remains in the Dutch sector of the continental shelf. These models are coarse-grained due to the relatively low density of geological data on which they are primarily based, and a high degree of expert knowledge is needed to understand and interpret model outcomes. Risk assessments are constrained by the coarseness of the models, which do not permit researchers to evaluate research potential and threats at the scale of individual spatial developments. This limitation hinders pro-active approaches to mitigation, conservation, and designation. The sparseness of good data points makes it difficult, if not impossible, to explicitly make clear which archaeological interests are at stake. As a consequence, geoarchaeological assessments of individual project areas lead to generic designations of zones of potential archaeological interest, without any follow-up to test the validity of the believed potential. This leads to a paradoxical situation. Many exiting finds continue to be made, and these attract a lot of media attention; they are the hard evidence of human presence in a landscape that has become sea. Public outreach activities have been very successful. But whereas such finds spark the imagination of a broad audience, they have not (yet) led to the establishment of a management approach that demands serious research to move from assessing potential to model testing and observation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is no pressing need to define a new set of themes and topics, and priorities have not yet been met to such an extent that no further attention is needed. At the same time, major steps have been taken with regard to some issues, notably data sharing, collaboration with private collectors, and public outreach. These steps are important, and the related efforts should be maintained. In the final section, we present some recommendations, which are meant to serve as guides for further discussion and for targeting actions in the near future. These recommendations are grouped under three headings: contents (the subject of investigation), process (strategies, methods, techniques), and stakeholders (regulations, risk assessment, communication).&lt;/p&gt;