A comparative analysis of the implementation of the European landscape convention within an archaeological framework : grassroots engagement in the protection of archaeological resources in Malta

Abstract

The contemporary relevance of archaeology has become increasingly prominent in academic discourses of the discipline since the late 1980s. This post-processual direction in archaeological theory has led to much debate on the relationship between the public and archaeology. This paradigm shift is reflected in archaeological theory, and in the aims and objectives of international heritage conventions that ultimately form the backbone of archaeological practice. Two of the more relevant heritage conventions are the European Landscape Convention and the Faro Convention, today considered to be significant milestones in the redefinition of what constitutes cultural heritage, as well as setting the bar for the role of the public in heritage issues. The present study examines the relationship between archaeology and the public in Malta, and public engagement in the protection of archaeological heritage. Changing trends in the literature and in the international heritage conventions are considered. This is explored on a broader, international scale in the archaeological literature, as well as on the more specific scale of the situation in Malta. The interface between public and protagonists in Malta is explored through a number of qualitative in-depth interviews, conducted with key professionals from within heritage NGOs and members of the public from citizen-led heritage awareness groups. The data gathered from these interviews informs a thematic analysis of grassroots public engagement with archaeological resources in Malta, and its protection. The direct engagement of civil society in the protection of archaeological heritage resources is found to be in a state of flux. New forms of citizen engagement are emerging, spurred by a low level of confidence in institutional frameworks, and facilitated by social media. It is argued that a divide between the views and perspectives of the professional archaeological community and the wider Maltese public still persists today.