Stephen Trow
Head of National Rural and Environmental Advice, English Heritage, 1 Waterhouse Square, 
138 - 142 Holborn, London, EC1N 2ST, steve.trow@english-heritage.org.uk

Some 40% of Europe is farmed and 47% forested. The future of the majority of Europe's archaeological sites and its historic cultural landscapes therefore depends to a great extent on the trajectories and impacts of particular rural land uses which, in most countries, lie outside the influence of their spatial planning and development control systems. The impacts that arise from agricultural and forestry practices are, therefore, rarely subject to the processes of archaeological assessment, avoidance and recording that, in recent years, have become an increasingly well-established aspect of the spatial planning system in many countries. The damage occurring as a result of these rural land-use pressures is, for the most part, taking place unseen and without an archaeological response.

The overall scale of these impacts at the European level must be considerable, but is currently poorly understood. Some impression can, nevertheless, be gained through the rapid progress now being made with the Europe-wide monitoring of land use change. For example, figures from the European Environment Agency (EEA 2006) demonstrate that, between 1990 and 2000, some 7,533 km2 of land was afforested or re-afforested and 9,330 km2 of pasture was converted to arable cultivation and cropping. In some areas, the rate at which grassland - generally a benign environment for archaeological remains - was lost was remarkable. The EEA estimated, for example, that during this period, 10% of all grassland was lost in the Atlantic bocage region of Normandy. Although the rate of change appears to have slowed between 2000 and 2006 (EEA 2010) an additional 1,114 km2 of land was newly afforested and 5,410 km2 of additional land was turned over to arable cultivation and cropping. By way of comparison, the Agency records that 9,556 km2 of land was developed or urbanised between 1990 and 2000 and 6,258 km2 between 2000 and 2006.

Fig. 1: The condition of the Arbury Banks prehistoric enclosure, Northamptonshire, England, graphically illustrates the destructive power of arable cultivation.  Photograph: English Heritage

Some impression of the scale of the impacts arising from agriculture can also be gained from the handful of European countries - England, Northern Ireland, Norway, the Republic of Ireland and Wales - that have recently published quantified audits of the state of their national archaeological resource. In all cases the impacts and risks to sites arising from agricultural processes is recorded as outstripping those arising from development and urbanisation, in some cases by a very significant margin (see Trow 2010).

In order to consider how best to address these impacts, the EAA established a Working Group on Farming, Forestry and Rural Land Management in 2004 which, in 2009, was also adopted by Europae Archaeologiae Consilium. This Joint EAA/EAC Working Group now includes nearly 30 participants, from 14 countries. While some of its members work in state heritage or archaeological services, others work in academic institutions or in forestry, land management or nature conservation organizations, ensuring a considerable breadth of expertise is available.

The group has staged a number of conference sessions and workshops at EAA annual meetings and at the 2008 World Archaeological Congress. In December 2010, it published a collection of these papers in EAC Occasional Paper 4 Heritage Management of Farmed and Forested Landscapes in Europe (see Jerem/Domanovszky in this edition of TEA).

In addition to producing this volume, the Working Group has been particularly active in relation to the current round of reform of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which will come into effect after 2013. This reform will have major implications for the impact of agriculture on the European archaeological resource, even beyond the boundaries of the EU. It will also influence the substantial spending on archaeological site management that some member states currently derive from their CAP-funded environmental farming schemes.

The Working Group has therefore been co-operating closely with other European organisations with interests in cultural heritage and landscapes, particularly Europa Nostra (http://www.europanostra.org/), to ensure that conservation of the archaeology and historic cultural landscapes of Europe are recognized within the robust debate currently taking place on the "public goods" that should be delivered by the EU's agricultural policy. In 2010, in support of this objective, the Working Group published the position paper Europe' Living Landscapes: Cultural Heritage as a Force for Rural Development jointly with Europa Nostra and others (see http://www.e-a-a.org/elan2010_2.pdf). This has been distributed widely to stakeholders in the CAP discourse and has facilitated discussions with key EU officials. Progress to date has, therefore, been promising, but much more remains to be achieved. 

Arguably, the impacts of agriculture and forestry on the archaeological record and cultural landscapes of Europe generally receive far less attention than the impacts arising from development and yet may be far more destructive. This should be a matter of grave concern to all archaeologists, no matter where or in what discipline they work. So the EAA/EAC Working Group continues to seek further members - including representatives from southern and eastern Europe, which are still poorly represented in its membership. In September the group will stage a round table session (organised by Leif Gren, Ingunn Holm, Stephen Trow and Jonathan Wordsworth) at the 17th Annual EAA meeting in Oslo. This will address the theme Managing sites or managing landscapes: What is the proper concern for archaeologists? and all members of EAA are welcome to attend.