The University of Queensland in Brisbane
Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Management in Risk Assessment (ICHDR #6 (PhD) Year 2)
This PhD project, based at the University of Queensland, will investigate the role of archaeology and cultural heritage management (CHM) in risk assessment and remedy processes within the mining industry. The successful researcher will undertake in-depth research with one or more of the Training Centre’s industry partner organisations, or other relevant organisations, to analyse and ultimately influence the organisational and institutional systems within which CHM is practised in the Australian resources sector.
The project aims to advance the integration of archaeology and CHM into the mining industry’s core business decision-making processes. It will also contribute to a deeper understanding of remedy mechanisms in situations where breaches, inadequate practices, or management failures have resulted in loss and damage for Traditional Owners. Progress towards these goals has the potential to rebalance power dynamics both between the social and physical sciences and between Traditional Owners and mining industry professionals within organisational settings.
A critical question for cultural heritage management concerns how the corporate responsibility to respect human rights (“Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework Ruggie, 2008), is implemented in practice. While major mining companies may draw upon the UN Framework as part of their internal risk management systems, important questions remain: Who defines risk? Are risk assessments primarily focused on protecting corporate interests and reputation, or do they adequately prioritise risks to affected communities and Traditional Owners?
Further questions arise regarding the organisational positioning of archaeology and CHM practitioners within mining companies. What risks emerge when these professionals are siloed within broader corporate portfolios and excluded from strategic decision-making processes? Although Juukan Gorge was widely recognised as a site of exceptional significance, assessing significance in mining regions can be particularly complex due to the cumulative impacts of resource extraction on cultural heritage. In such contexts, are risks understood and evaluated differently? Furthermore, is there ever a legitimate role for cultural offsets as a management strategy, rather than compensation after harm has occurred? These questions sit at the centre of ongoing debates about heritage protection, corporate accountability, and the rights of Indigenous peoples in resource development contexts.
