Page 85 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 13(1) (2025)
P. 85

History and Practice of Contract Archaeology in Namibia
                                Zgodovina in praksa pogodbene arheologije v Namibiji



                                                 Goodman Gwasira
                                                 University of Namibia
                                                  ggwasira@unam.na


                   Abstract
                   This article traces how contract archaeology in Namibia emerged and consolidated after 1990 at the in-
                   tersection of environmental regulation, donor requirements, and large-scale development – especially
                   mining and energy infrastructure. It shows that, for decades, practice was largely self-regulated in the ab-
                   sence of national guidelines, drawing authority from Environmental Impact Assessments and the Na-  85
                   tional Heritage Act. Comparing regional standards (e.g. SAHRA, ASAPA), the paper argues for clear
                   standard operating procedures, professional accreditation, and capacity building to ensure ethical, con-
                   sistent work that contributes to scholarship and community engagement. It concludes that Namibia
                   now has an opportunity to professionalise the field, leverage ‘grey literature’ for research, and align her-
                   itage protection with sustainable development.
                   Keywords: contract archaeology, Namibia, environmental impact assessment, cultural heritage manage-
                   ment, heritage impact assessment

                   Izvleček
                   Članek oriše nastanek in utrditev pogodbene arheologije v Namibiji po letu 1990 na presečišču okolj-
                   skih predpisov, zahtev donatorjev in obsežnih razvojnih projektov – zlasti v rudarstvu in energetiki. Po-
                   kaže, da se je praksa dolgo opirala na samoregulacijo ter na postopke presoje vplivov na okolje in Naci-
                   onalni zakon o dediščini, saj nacionalnih smernic ni bilo. V primerjavi z regionalnimi standardi (npr.
                   SAHRA, ASAPA) avtor zagovarja jasne postopke, profesionalno akreditacijo in krepitev zmogljivo-
                   sti za etično, usklajeno delo, ki prispeva k znanosti in vključevanju skupnosti. Zaključi, da ima Nami-
                   bija priložnost za profesionalizacijo področja, raziskovalno rabo »sive« literature in boljše usklajevanje
                   varstva dediščine s trajnostnim razvojem.
                   Ključne besede: pogodbena arheologija, Namibija, presoja vplivov na okolje, upravljanje kulturne dediš-
                   čine, presoja vplivov na dediščino

               Introduction                                archaeologists have long positioned themselves –
                     ontract archaeology in Namibia emerged   and continue to do so – as the providers of spe-
                     as a response to shifts in the local and   cialist archaeological services because environ-
               Cinternational legislation regarding en-    mental impact assessments require specialist
               vironmental impact management. These laws,   reports for cultural heritage as well.
               policies, and regulations made it mandatory     In addition to the heritage and environ-
               for developers to enable pre-development envi-  mental legislation, the development of contract
               ronmental impact assessments to be conduct-  archaeology was promoted by the international
               ed. According to the Namibian environmental   funding institutions in the field of development
               and heritage laws, the developer is responsible   aid that made predevelopment surveys a prereq-
               for paying for the impact assessments (Nation-  uisite for funding major development projects
               al Heritage Act 2004, S. 54, ss. 7). As such,    in the country. The attainment of Namibian
               https://doi.org/10.26493/2350-5443.13(1)85-99                  © author/authors
   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90