Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative interview study reveals gaps between theory and practice in heritage management across England, highlighting the need to integrate public engagement with financial security.
Public archaeological sites are vulnerable to changes such as pandemics and climate change, while having high potential as drivers of sustainability. However, managing archaeology projects might be challenging, mostly due to the lack of organizational, financial, or social resources to ensure their sustainable management. This research aims to investigate the management practices and develop key themes of sustainable management in the public archaeological sites in England because of its leading role in public archaeology. It thoroughly investigates this topic by examining the contemporary conjuncture of the heritage environment through the perspectives of key informants. Adopting a qualitative research design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 key informants who have worked on archaeological projects from different sectors across England. Rather than categorizing sustainable management as social, economic, an environmental, the findings indicate that sustainable management is still compound intersecting these categories in various key themes: “Planning for Public,” “Using Archaeology for Good,” “Establishing a Public Engagement Cycle,” “Collaboration and Coordination,” “Community Involvement,” “Communication,” “Accessibility,” and “Financial Security.” The results show that while the “sustainable management of archaeological sites” remains largely a buzzword in theory, it is not yet reflected in practice. Furthermore, this study shows a strong demand for public interest in heritage management, as well as how sustainable management is closely tied to financial concerns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Merve Çalışkan (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: