Communities, Heritage and the Anthropocene

Abstract

At the Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage we seek to take a global perspective while providing space for communities and individuals to present local (and sometimes hyper local) projects. Thus, in our editorials we frequently discuss the impact of global events – such as the environmental crisis, the Black Lives Matter movement, the war in Ukraine and other conflicts – on local communities and their heritage. While the war in Eastern Europe rages on and the situation in the middle East, including Israel/Palestine and the more recent outbreak of civil war in Sudan are leaving deep scars on the communities in these places, heritage is frequently raised as both being at risk as well as a political tool for all sides involved. This underscores the importance of providing the space to hear the perspectives from local communities. Since the last issue of JCAH appeared there has been a devastating earthquake affecting southern Türkiye (Turkey) and northern Syria (see below), while currently the skies throughout eastern parts of North America are clouded in smoke from hundreds of forest fires raging across eastern Canada. Although the plate tectonics that lead to earthquakes cannot be linked to human causes, the unequal nature by which their devastation affects communities is something that has clear human origins. The current forest fires in North America, on the other hand, can be almost entirely seen as a human-made catastrophe, linked to the climatic changes we are experiencing within the Anthropocene. They follow on from the enormous heatwave large parts of Canada witnessed last summer, as well as similar heatwaves, droughts but also flooding events many parts of the world – from Australia to Italy, Pakistan and Nigeria – have seen in the past 12 months. In this context, the most recent report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change spells out that in order to avoid the most devastating consequences of continuing global warming, the global community needs to implement ‘immediate greenhouse gas emissions reductions in all sectors this decade’ and move towards net zero CO2 emissions as soon as possible (IPPC 2023). While there is an onus on everyone to act, those with the most resources (countries, individuals, institutions and companies) have the greatest responsibility to show leadership here. As we have been critical of their stance on the issue of fossil fuel industry sponsorship on these pages before, we wanted to offer credit where we thought credit was due and congratulate the British Museum on its decision to finally sever ties with BP, as was reported in the Guardian on 2 June (Addley 2023). However, it seems these reports were premature and Kendall Adams (2023) reported in the Museum Journal four days later that no firm decision has been taken by either the British Museum or BP on the matter. This could be taken as a more general metaphor for the huge grip the coffers of big fossil fuel corporations continue to have over the culture, heritage and many other sectors. It highlights real concerns among heritage institutions about who would be able to replace the funding such lucrative deals with oil companies have provided (and continue to provide). However, we also wonder whether this debate represents a little bit of a red herring, as such lucrative deals with multinational corporations tend to be reserved only for some of the world’s largest, ‘leading’ and best-known institutions, while there is little sign of a ‘trickle down’ effect onto small, local and community-led heritage organizations. In fact, many local heritage initiatives – especially, but by no means exclusively, in the global South – are feeling the negative consequences of the climate change induced by the burning of fossil fuels, rather than the benefit from the industry’s massive profits. Kerr’s contribution to the