REPORT TO PARLIAMENT MINISTERE DE LA CULTURE ET DE LA COMMUNICATION. Volume 1. Implementation of the appended law of January 17 th, 2001

Transcription

1 MINISTERE DE LA CULTURE ET DE LA COMMUNICATION REPORT TO PARLIAMENT Implementation of the appended law of January 17 th, 2001 Relating to preventive archaelogy Volume 1 February 2006

2 Illustrations 1 ère de couverture Puisserguier, Hérault. Tombe n 8, du premier âge du Fer (VII e siècle av. J.-C.). C. Olive, DRAC SRA Languedoc-Roussillon. Basse terre, Guadeloupe. Adorno (figurine modelée appliquée). A. Chancerel, DRAC SRA Guadeloupe. Mirecourt, Vosges. Vue d ensemble d un four à pain. INRAP. Chartres, Eure-et-Loir Vue générale des fouilles de la place des Épars. Service municipal d archéologie Ville de Chartres. Le Cendre, Puy-de-Dôme. Vue verticale de la fosse après décapage. U. Cabazuelo, INRAP. Delle, Territoire-de-Belfort. Vue générale de la villa dans sont état final. INRAP. Bordeaux, Gironde. Place Jean-Moulin, vue du chantier en cours de fouille. W. Migeon, INRAP. Piriac, Loire-Atlantique. Fibule. M.-L. Hervé, INRAP. Illustrations 4 ème de couverture Malleville-sur-le-Bec, Eure. Céramiques de l Âge du Bronze. INRAP. Autun, Saône-et-Loire. Stèle d un artisan du métal. INRAP. Bergerac, Dordogne. Silex taillé solutréen en «feuille de laurier» du site de Cantalouette. INRAP. Ajaccio, Corse-du-Sud. Baptistère Saint-Jean. INRAP. Nice, Alpes-Maritimes. Vue de la tour Pairolière. F. Suméra, DRAC SRA Provence-Alpes-Côte d Azur. Saint-Dizier, Haute-Marne. Émaux cloisonnés, époque franque. B. Bagault, C2RMF. Aire-sur-le-Lys, Pas-de-Calais. Cercle et vases funéraires de l Âge du Bronze. INRAP. Toulouse, Haute-Garonne. Bague en ambre du I er siècle. INRAP.

3 REPORT TO PARLIAMENT Implementation of the appended law of January 17th, 2001 Relating to preventive archaeology Volume 1 February 2006

4 Preventive archaeology 2

5 Contents Contents... 3 Acronyms Preventive archaeology-related legislation and its application The situation prior to February 1st, 2002 and the origins of the law of January 17th, : The law of January 17th, 2001 came into effect August 1st, 2003: a new law for preventive archaeology The developments and applications of the legislation on preventive archaeology since The progressive adaptation of preventive archaeology tools for implementation that is more attuned to the law The players in preventive archaeology The French government Preventive archaeology scientific control agencies Local authority archaeological departments The French National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (INRAP) Private operators The CNRS and the University Funding The fiscal apparatus The preventive archaeology tax mechanisms and its various changes The yield from the preventive archaeology tax The [French] National Fund for Preventive Archaeology The computer software for help in liquidating and scheduling the RAP by the DRACs INRAP's financial situation Budget The state of tax repayment to INRAP and the FNAP Proposals for improving INRAP's financial situation The French national archaeological map The history of the national archaeological map Recording major archaeological monuments in the first inventories starting in With the 1945 validation of the law of 1941, the notion of a mapped inventory of archaeological deposits and carried-out excavations came into existence The need for a computerised inventory was confirmed in 1974, just before the big development of preventive archaeology Taking stock of archaeological heritage including an inventory and map of known sites benefiting from the results of operations connected to urban and rural development works in the 1990s The archaeological map in the heritage code Defitinitions and goals of the geo-referenced archaeological database A single database gathering all validated, available archaeological data, managed by the Ministry of Culture The "map" is an inventory relying on a geo-referenced database that enables the mapping of the distribution of archaeological deposits A permanently evolving database that takes progress in research into consideration Know, study, use: three objectives for the French archaeological map Conditions for implementing and the state of progress Making the French archaeological map The state of progress Communications and the communicability of information The principles established by the texts... 59

6 Preventive archaeology The limits of communicability Forms of communications A tool for disseminating archaeological data: the Architecture and Heritage Atlas The prescription and implementation of preventive archaeology operations Procedures Determining the "archaeological sensitivity" conditions the transfer of development files with a view to their being investigated by the prefect Appraisal by the prefect of development projects Prescribing preventive archaeology operations Diagnostic prescriptions Excavation prescriptions Implementing preventive archaeology Diagnostics Excavations Annexes...85 Annex 1: Current legislation and regulations concerning preventive archaeology 87 Annex 2: Collecting the preventive archaeology tax 89 Annex 3: [French] National Archaeological Map 95 Annex 4 : French regions 100 4

7 Report to Parlement Acronyms ACR AFAN CIRA CNRA CNRS DAPA DDE DGCP DRAC DRASSM DVRD FNAP IGAPA INRAP MINEFI PCR RAP Actions collectives de recherche (Collective Research Actions) Association pour les fouilles archéologiques nationales (National Archaeological Excavations Association) Commission interrégionale de la recherche archéologique (Interregional Commission for Archaeological Research) Conseil national de la recherche archéologique (National Council for Archaeological Research) Centre national de la recherche scientifique (National Centre for Scientific Research) Direction de l'architecture et du patrimoine (Directorate of Architecture and Heritage) Direction départementale de l'equipement (Départemental Directorate of Infrastructure) Direction générale de la comptabilité publique (General Directorate of Public Accounting) Direction régionales des affaires culturelles (Regional Directorate of Cultural Affairs) Département des recherches archéologiques subaquatiques et sous-marines (Department of Underwater and Submarine Archaeological Research) Demande volontaire de réalisation de diagnostic (Voluntary Request for a Diagnostics Survey) Fonds national pour l'archéologie préventive (National Fund for Preventive Archaeology) Inspection générale de l'architecture et du patrimoine (General Architecture and Heritage Inspectorate) Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives (National Institute of Preventive Archaeological Research) Ministère de l'economie et des Finances (Ministry of the Economy and Finance) Projet collectif de recherche (Collective Research Project) Redevance d'archéologie préventive (Preventive Archaeology Tax) SD Archetis Sous-direction de l'archéologie, de l'ethnologie, de l'inventaire et du système d'information (Sub-Directorate of Archaeology, Ethnology, Inventory and the Information System) SRA UMR Service régional de l'archéologie (Regional Department of Archaeology) Unité mixte de recherche (Mixed Research Unit) 5

8 Preventive archaeology ZAC Zone d'aménagement concerté (Mixed-use Development Zone) 6

9 Report to Parlement 1. Preventive archaeology-related legislation and its application 1.1. The situation prior to February 1st, 2002 and the origins of the law of January 17th, 2001 Preventive archaeology built on empirical yet pragmatic foundations A result of the expansion of the major development projects and renovations that have remodelled the French landscape since the 1960s on a scale never before seen, preventive archaeology has progressively developed over the past nearly forty years in an empirical way, outside of an adapted legal framework. Indeed its expansion came in the wake of the validated law of 1941 on archaeology that was unable to give a relevant framework for exercising this scientific activity that was subjected to the pace and schedule for carrying out development and building operations. Thus the various French departments, observing the threats that development projects imposed on national heritage were gradually able to require that initial archaeological operations be carried out and to get developers to assume part of the costs. This latter point at the national level meant something like from 45 to 60 million euros per year. The funds were collected with the support of the Ministry of Finance through an association, the Association for National Archaeological Excavations (AFAN), which acted as the state's services provider in the field. It also provided a lot of flexibility, especially in recruiting essential staff. Although whole swaths of national heritage were thus preserved without national development being particularly disrupted, the legal loophole weighed on archaeology in general and on its various players, whether institutional, associational or charities even though this aspect of the archaeological field, which supplies 90% of the scientific data, is a major tool in managing traces of our past and in restoring the history of the environment. The origins of the law of January 17 th, 2001 Clarifying the legal regime of preventive archaeology has occurred through both external and internal causes. The first was due to the need to conform to France's international commitments that had played an essential role in concluding the European Convention on Protecting Archaeological Heritage, signed in Malta on January 16th, 1992 and ratified in France by law # of October 26th, In particular the convention obliged member states to establish a legal regime for protecting archaeological heritage that could guarantee the scientific nature of archaeological operations and to ensure funding through appropriate channels. Secondly a debate emerged over AFAN's legal nature and its operations, as well as about their compatibility with the national and community competition laws. This debate gave rise to an internal crisis at AFAN by causing the association's staff to worry about the future of their standing. Faced with these tensions, the French government at first sought the opinion of the competitiveness commission about applying the national and European community rules on competition to preventive archaeology excavations. 7

10 Preventive archaeology Delivered on May 19th, 1998 and concluding that carrying out excavations was an economic activity that should be submitted to the rules governing the right to competition, the board's judgement fomented a lot of emotion in the world of archaeology. The system it called for incidentally posed a number of legal and practical problems. To get around this obstacle, the minister of culture and communications on October 9th, 1998 asked Messrs Bernard Pêcheur, state counsellor, Bernard Poignant, mayor of Quimper, and Jean-Paul Demoule, university professor, to write a report on a reform for preventive archaeology. The report came to the conclusion that there was a need to affirm the public service nature and preventive archaeology's scientific nature and give a preference to creating a public agency that could intervene as an operator and be in charge of implementing preventive archaeology operations as prescribed by governmental departments. It further proposed that preventive archaeology activities be funded by creating a tax payable by developers whose projects may have to an impact on archaeological heritage. Citing the report's main proposals, the French government submitted a draft preventivearchaeology law to Parliament on May 5th, After two readings by each of the two houses and the failure of the joint parliamentary committee, the law was passed after a final reading by the Assemblée Nationale on December, Submitted to the Constitutional Council by over sixty deputies, the law was at last declared by the Council to conform to the constitution on January 16th, The law became official on January 17th, 2001 and was published in the French Republic's Journal Officiel (Official Journal) on January 18th, : The law of January 17th, 2001 came into effect The purview and objectives of the law of January 17th, 2001 The preventive archaeology law of January 17th, 2001 was an unprecedented event in the history of national archaeology, probably less because it leant a legal framework to an empiracallycomposed discipline rather than because it reinforced a number of principles that archaeology-related government departments managed to get accepted by the majority of developers over time but sometimes not without difficulty. Foremost among them was the affirmation of the state's role of prescription, monitoring and scientific assessment. To carry out preventive archaeology operations beginning with the AFAN, the law established a public agency of an administrative nature that would be jointly run by the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry in charge of research. Its purpose was to do diagnostic operations and excavations on behalf of the state that were made necessary by the risks of destroying archaeological remains when work was undertaken. Within this framework it ensured research, publication, dissemination, leadership and training. It is the French government's responsibility to ensure the equality of services provided and costs and deadlines in dealing with archaeological heritage. 8

11 Report to Parlement The law of January 17th, 2001 enshrined the principle of a double levy, i.e. one for diagnostic operations, and the other for preventive archaeology excavations. Striving to simplify, a single rate would apply to these two kinds of tax as follows: the levy relating to diagnostic operations that showed a simple, unified way of calculation dealt only with the surface area directly affected by the operations the amount of the levy applicable to preventive excavations, which varied according to the kind of archaeological site (stratified or not) by calculating the average height of the archaeological layer and the number of archaeological structures as determined in the diagnostic operations In both cases with the charge tolerated being proportional to the amount of land needed for the work and the projected development, the purpose of the levy mechanism established by the law of January 17th, 2001 was to enable developers to forecast the cost of test drilling and diagnoses as early as the prescription phase by the French government departments and by applying already existing rules for calculating, drilling and diagnosing, which afterwards could be re-assessed, e.g. the unexpected discovery of remains or unforeseen difficulties. Moreover the law assigned the liquidation and collecting of the levy to the public body based only on the physical plan, with no discretionary capabilities in this regard, since the state departments are the ones, without exception, that determine all calculation parameters for taxes, i.e. its basis of assessment. The law of January 17th, 2001 applied Implementing the new law on preventive archaeology with the issuance of decrees for the application and founding of the National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (INRAP) early the following year made up a very large part of the activities of preventive archaeology-related departments of the Ministry of Culture and Communications in With the decree of January 16th, 2002 relating to the administrative and financial procedures in preventive archaeology matters, as well as the decree dealing with the public agency, INRAP, and the implementation of the latter on February 1st, 2002, the law of January 17th, 2001 entered its genuine application phase. One of the priorities of the department of architecture and heritage at the Ministry of Culture (DAPA) in its first six months was to ensure the implementation of the new agency in the best conditions possible and to establish an operating method in the relationships between government departments and INRAP. Moreover numerous by-laws were written, e.g. a joint decree between culture and research about the standardisation of reports; a decree relating to the standards of identification, classification and conditioning of the scientific documentation and furniture and fixtures; a decree relating to the conservation conditions of archaeological furniture and fixtures by local communities, etc. 9

12 Preventive archaeology And several companion circulars were produced: a technical circular, dated May 3rd, sent to the regional archaeological departments (SRA), contains chapters on zoning and thresholds, diagnostics, procedures (referrals, deadlines, the role of inter-regional archaeological research committees [CIRA], prescriptions, monitoring and assessment), the communicability levels of the archaeological map, the remains of buildings, etc. a joint circular with the Ministry of Infrastructure on the inclusion of preventive archaeology urban-planning procedures Implementing the new configuration also went hand in hand with the implementation of an exchange network and by close co-operation with the leadership of INRAP, most especially through the creation of an observatory for the implementation of the new set-up that made it possible to examine the early decisions made by the regional archaeological departments and their execution by the public entity. But reforming archaeology cannot be entirely attributed to the implementation of the new public entity and the new set of by-laws. It also provided the occasion for redefining the role and relationships between the various archaeological players in France (the CNRS, universities, local communities, etc.) as well as the development of a more participational policy, e.g. through the implementation of collective actions enhancing knowledge produced by preventive archaeology, in particular by the inception of joint research units (UMR). Malfunctions began to emerge in the autumn of 2002 Imperfections in the January 17th, 2001 law caused a crisis during the month of September, 2002 that imperilled the whole initiative. Income from the preventive archaeology levy (RAP) proved insufficient to fund field operations and made it impossible for INRAP to execute its budget according to the stated conditions and to ensure proper cash flow. The method used for calculating the levy set by legislators led to imposing most of the financial burden on rural developments, whereas urban developments were by and large exempt. The taxes called for were often out of sync with the costs of the projected development, sometimes even threatening to unbalance their budgets. Among other things, this situation led Parliament to pass an amendment in November of 2002; it was included in the draft finances law of 2003 reducing the tax for preventive archaeology by 25% August 1st, 2003: a new law for preventive archaeology In the autumn of 2002 the Ministry of Culture and Communications therefore undertook an in-depth study of the causes for the system's malfunctions and brainstorming on the improvements to be made to the system as part of a required change to the law. Appending the law of January 17th, 2001 Work on reforming the law of January 17th, 2001 took place right to the end of the first half of The reform focused particularly on the following two of the system's basic features: 10

13 Report to Parlement sharing INRAP's monopoly in diagnostics with the authorised archaeological departments of local communities, with the diagnostics being funded by a tax to be determined by a new calculating method opening excavations to competition, i.e. they could henceforth be done by authorised public or private operators and would be funded at market prices. The developer became the main contractor of the excavations and contracted with an authorised operator of his or her choice who then invoiced the services provided This reform was passed by Parliament in the summer of 2003; for its financial aspect, Law of August 1st, 2003 came into force on November 1st, The state's central role was reinforced The legislative reform saw the state confirmed in its role as guarantor of the scientific quality of the preventive archaeology operations carried out. It prescribed the operations required and monitored their execution as well as the scientific use of the findings. It also ensured the reconciliation required by the mission's general interest and the imperatives that went with national planning and development. A greater involvement by local governments in carrying out diagnostic operations The law reinforced the role of the archaeological departments of local governments since it set out that doing the diagnostics would be shared by the local government's archaeological departments and INRAP. Those local governments with an accredited archaeological department could thus choose between carrying out one-off diagnostics or take over the entire diagnostic operations prescribed for the local government's area for a renewable three-year period. In diagnostic matters then the law maintained a public monopoly, which was justified by the need to ensure the objectivity of these operations, the purpose of which was to detect and characterise the possible archaeological remains present in the ground, enabling the French government to prescribe suitable safeguards. Carrying out excavations was open to already-authorised private operators One of the biggest innovations in the law of August 1st, 2003 lay in opening up the execution of excavations to private operators who were already approved to carry out such excavations. Indeed the law provided for the developer to take over control of the archaeological excavations prior to undertaking his or her own development. To do so, not only could INRAP be consulted but also an archaeological department of the local government or any other public- or private-law moral person if he or she were properly authorised and that the state approved the planned excavations and named a scientific leader for the excavations upon a proposal by the operator. With respect to its public service brief, the public entity was obliged to carry out the excavations should all other potential operators opt out. 11

14 Preventive archaeology Excavation operations gave rise to the payment of a sum determined by contract between the developer and the operator with the progressive increase in the number of potential operators being such as to result in controlling these operations' costs. The levy system established by the law of January 17th, 2001 was thus radically changed. A single tax for funding general-interest activities and which strove to establish broad income-pooling The law of August 1st, 2003 set out a new tax system, levied on all projects affecting the underground site or a surface area greater than 3,000 square metres. The tax was determined by applying a rate of 0.32 euros per square metre, linked to the quarterly index of construction costs. Levying the tax was therefore no longer linked to the diagnostic prescription but was applied to all work likely to affect the sub-soil by striving for a pooling of income that the law of January 17th, 2001 did not originally provide for. The exemptions established by the previous system for building state-assisted rental housing were maintained, as they were for physical persons building for themselves. It also includes agriculturalor woodland-related excavation. This tax was for funding the following: diagnostics done by INRAP or local government departments an equalisation fund for 30% of its amount for covering the cost of excavations on developments submitted for authorisation in the name of the urban planning code and exempted from taxation. It also made it possible to provide aid in the form of subsidies to non-exempted developers but who were unable to meet the costs of preventive excavation operations the use and dissemination of the results of preventive archaeology operations The base and clearance of this tax were entrusted to the following: infrastructure departments of départements (DDE) for all development cases that were covered by the urban planning code regional departments of cultural affairs (DRACs) for other developments 12

15 Report to Parlement Archaeological activity control In parallel to the difficulties linked to the money generated by the tax as it was established by the law of January 17th, 2001 and to the amendments aimed at changing it, the Ministry of Culture and Communications implemented a policy of controlling preventive archaeology activity so as to ensure greater compatibility between the time-frames for carrying out diagnostic operations and schedules for development projects. A joint study by the Ministry and INRAP on all prescriptions delivered after February 1st, 2002 led to measures for lightening INRAP's load plan. It was followed by a circular requesting the SRAs for greater selectivity in their prescriptions, in particular intending to limit the number of archaeological prescriptions for small-scale developments which consumed relatively more in operational means and the results of which were more uncertain. Tools were also implemented with a view to ensuring guidance in the advancement of the number of development cases processed and prescriptions issued by the regional archaeology departments of the DRACs The developments and applications of the legislation on preventive archaeology since 2004 A needed adjustment of the preventive archaeology tax linked to operations covered by the urban-planning code When the law of August 1st, 2003 came into effect, it showed that the fiscal conditions applicable to developments linked to the urban-planning code, which provided for the tax being based on the surface area of the unit of land (all adjoining parcels of land belonging to the same owner) encompassing the development, in a certain number of particular cases led to generating taxes the amounts of which had nothing in common with the size of the projects that generated them. Indeed in cases where the land surface unit was extensive while the development covered only a small surface area and above all was of little value, the amount of tax may be too high to be tolerated by the developer. Law number of August 9th, 2004 in support of consumption and investment thus included a certain number of amendments intended to make the preventive archaeology tax system evolve on the following points: the RAP owed on development projects governed by the urban-planning code was then calculated along lines resembling the local infrastructure tax with the application of a 0.3% rate for the real estate values defined in article 1585 D of the general income-tax code the mixed-use development zones (ZACs), until recently handled for the RAP by the DRACs, were no longer taxable even at the same level of the law that authorised them and were subject to the RAP for each authorisation of urban planning deriving from them. The settlement and scheduling of the tax on this point was transferred to the DDE 13

16 Preventive archaeology having been imposed according the conditions of the previous system, taxpayers had the possibility of asking for a recalculation of their rates according to these new conditions. Application of the law of January 17th, 2001: continuing the standardisation process Standardisation continued simultaneously in 2004 and 2005 with the publication of documents at various levels: the new decree about administrative and financial procedures in preventive archaeology was finalised and published in the Journal Officiel of June 5th, It is an important document containing over one hundred articles and covers the enforcement of the law of January 17th, 2001 as it was appended by the law of August 1st, 2003; it was not changed by the new tax features introduced by the law of August 9th, 2004 and remains in force today. In particular it defines the framework and procedures that organise the sharing of the INRAP monopoly in diagnostic matters with the authorised departments of local governments and the opening of archaeological excavations to authorised private operators decree of August 25th, 2004 concerning the definition of good conservation conditions of archaeological fixtures and fittings decree of September 16th, 2004 providing a definition of the standards of identification, inventory, classification and the conditioning of scientific documentation and fixtures and fittings from archaeological diagnostics and excavations decree of September 27th, 2004 providing for the definition of the standards for the content and format of archaeological operation reports a joint circular from the DAPA and the roads and land transport departments of the Ministry of Infrastructure concerning co-operation between the development departments and the regional archaeological departments and the collection of the tax for building transport infrastructures. Signed on November 24th, 2004, it clarifies the ways to pay the preventive archaeology tax by the DRACs for projects concerning motorways, rail links or the building of navigable waterways a joint circular between the DAPA and the department of urban planning, habitat and construction in the Ministry of Infrastructure about the preventive archaeology tax. Signed June 23rd, 2005, it sets out the new rules to be implemented by the DDEs in charge of the payment and scheduling of the development tax for authorisation or declaration in the name of the urban planning code It is worth noting that henceforth law number of January 17th, 2001 on preventive archaeology and subsequently appended twice became a part of the heritage code with the law's being validated on September 27th 1941 about regulations for archaeological excavations. 14

17 Report to Parlement Creation of a dedicated application software for liquidating and scheduling the preventive archaeology tax by the DRACs 2004 also saw the development of software for the DRACs to help them in liquidating and scheduling the preventive archaeology tax. The specifications for this software were elaborated in March 2004, and work began on it as a priority the following June. Testing on it began towards the end of 2004 with the finalised application being sent out to the regional departments of cultural affairs in April, It now enables the DRACs to work to harmonised procedures, produce fiscal documents that meet the criteria established by the department of public accounting in the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Industry (MINEFI) and to strengthen preventive archaeology tax income by materially simplifying the jobs of agents in charge of calculating its base The progressive adaptation of preventive archaeology tools for implementation that is more attuned to the law Although triggered by observable malfunctions, it should be stressed that the successive modifications of the law relating to archaeology demonstrate the clear-cut determination by lawmakers to reinforce the existence of preventive archaeology with a system that is better adapted to its purpose, one that takes closer consideration of the respective imperatives of archaeological heritage and economic development and which thus ensures better implementation that enhances understanding and acceptance by players in national planning and development. In this spirit the amendment added to the law of August 1st, 2003 in particular made it possible to guarantee better fiscal balance between rural and urban areas while offering developers a capacity for more directly controlling the cost of preventive excavations by the diversity of structures implemented for carrying out these operations. Concerning the fiscal changes approved in 2004, they ensured balance between the tax raised on the basis of the authorisations obtained for the urban-planning code and the real nature of the developments carried out in this framework. It is nonetheless true that the successive modifications caused instability in the rules for all players in preventive archaeology both in the implementation of the operations and from the funding processes point of view. From late in 2002 until late in 2004 this instability was in particular at the origin of difficulties encountered in administering preventive archaeology in general and in that of the INRAP in particular. Events in 2005, which was the first genuine fiscal year of constant law and rules, enabled the various players to reinforce procedures and steering tools today and for the coming years, and to thus plan to carry out preventive archaeology in a lasting manner in a calmer climate. 15

18

19 Report to Parlement 2. The players in preventive archaeology 2.1. The French government The architecture and heritage department of the Ministry of Culture (DAPA) In liaison with the competent administrations (research, higher learning) and bodies (CNRS, INRAP and CNRA), the architecture and heritage department of the Ministry of Culture defines national programming in archaeological research. It designs policy for inventory, studies, protection, conservation and enhancement of archaeological heritage. It defines methodological orientations and scientific control modalities. In liaison with the department of general administration at the ministry (DAG), it is in charge of preparing and updating the legislative texts and protecting rules for archaeological heritage (as well as the texts for applying the law of January 17th, 2001 on preventive archaeology), and it monitors their application. Its being more particularly a matter of preventive archaeology, the DAPA exercises control over the Institut National de Recherches archéologiques préventives (INRAP) through the devolved departments of archaeology, ethnology, inventory and the information system (SD Archétis) and for everything concerning it. As part of the IGAPA, five general inspectors archaeologists carry out assignements of inspection, advice, assessment and scientific expertise for both the devolved departments of the regional departments of cultural affairs and the central administration concerning issues about archaeology or department organisation. In close contact with the sub-department in charge of archaeology, they are consulted on topics of interest to steering research, enhancing scientific works, scientific and technical monitoring, career developments and training policies. As such, they can run national-level seminars in partnership for which they then act as relays at the regional level, in particular in the framework of regional assessments with a view to establishing scheduling. They participate directly and actively in inter-regional archaeological research commissions (CIRAs) the essential role of which is in the system of scientific archaeological control. They repercuss the debates that occur both at the national level and with each region of the inter-region with a view to national harmonisation. In this framework they may also be called upon to furnish expertise, advice and thoughts on touchy or conflicting field operations with the CIRA experts. With direct attachment to the DAPA, the department of underwater and submarine archaeological research (DRASSM), a department with nationwide jurisdiction, runs a certain number of particular preventive archaeological operations carried out within the waterway or public maritime fields. 17

20 Preventive archaeology Structure / Agents Number of agents % of time Cons. Res. Admin. Cons. Res. Admin. Sd Archétis Table 1: Agents assigned to following up preventive archaeology and time devoted by agent type to the department of architecture and heritage (Cons. = Conservation / Res. = Research / Admin. = Administration) Source: DAPA The department of general administration at the Ministry of Culture (DAG) The general administration department sees to three main types of mission: management in all or part of the human, material, real estate, computer and financial means made available to the central administration departments at the Ministry of Culture and Communications and the external departments (national or devolved) of the Ministry, as well as certain public agencies co-ordination in legal, budgetary, fiscal and professional matters in the Ministry's relations with its public agencies, the DRACs and the other ministries (budget, public sector, interior, etc.) studies and research of scientific, technological, sociological and economic aspects of the cultural sector Concerning preventive archaeology more in particular, the budget and financial affairs office handles relations with the ministry in charge of the budget. It supervises INRAP's finances and contributes to preparing the budget and monitoring its application. The regional archaeological services of the regional departments of cultural affairs (SRA) The Ministry of Culture has been present in each region since 1977 through the DRACs' actions. The law of February 6th, 1992 organising the national administration of the Republic makes of the government's devolved departments the common-law platform for its action. Placed under the authority of regional prefects, the regional departments of cultural affairs are in charge of implementing adapted to the regional context priorities defined in particular by the department of architecture and heritage of the Ministry of Culture for archaeological matters. The regional archaeological department in each DRAC is supposed to study, protect, conserve and promote the region's archaeological heritage. The following are its main activities: ensuring the application of legislation and rules, especially concerning archaeological digs and discoveries, the use of the surface and underground areas and protecting archaeological remains preparing the scheduling of escavations and annual prospection while keeping national recommendations in mind prescribing, monitoring and possibly directing preventive archaeology operations made necessary by land development (diagnostics and escavations) 18

21 Report to Parlement managing the computerised archaeological map, Patriarche, and documentation ensuring the publication of research findings monitoring escavation deposits co-ordinating archaeological activity in the region by getting involved most particularly by hosting events and informing the public SRA / Agents Number of agents % of time Cons. Res. Admin. Cons. Res. Admin. Alsace Aquitaine Auvergne Bourgogne (Burgundy) Bretagne (Brittany) Centre Champagne-Ardenne Corse (Corsica) Franche-Comté Ile-de-France (greater Paris reg.) Languedoc-Roussillon Limousin Lorraine Midi-Pyrénées Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Haute-Normandie Pays de la Loire (Loire River ) Picardie (Picardy) Poitou-Charentes Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur Rhône-Alpes Guadeloupe Martinique NC NC NC NC NC NC Guyane (French Guyana) National Table 2: Agents assigned to following up preventive archaeology and the average amount of time devoted per agent type in the regional archaeology departments (Cons. = heritage curators; Res. = research staff; admin. = administration staff Source: DRAC In all, this means that nearly 300 agents are involved in the DRAC's regional archaeological departments in informing development cases, in prescribing and monitoring operations or in administrative tasks covered by preventive archaeology. For those agents belonging to the conservation and research corps, the share of assignments devoted to preventive archaeology represent on average nearly two-thirds of their working time. 19

22 Preventive archaeology 2.2. Preventive archaeology scientific control agencies The [French] National Council of Archaeology Research (CNRA) The National Council of Archaeology Research is the guarantor of consistency for scientific policies in archaeological matters at the French national level. Directly depending on the Ministry of Culture, it is in part composed of elected representatives from archaeology interregional research commissions who thus ensure a high level of expertise for archaeological policies carried out by the regional departments of cultural affairs. Among other things, the council studies authorisation requests submitted by local community archaeological departments and private operators. It issues opinions intended to prepare for the ministerial decision-making that follows. Applications for authorisation requests are submitted to the expertise of one or two council members, who have been briefed by all the opinions they feel are necessary, including that of the regional archaeological curator with nationwide authorisation. Above all the examination deals with the scientific attributes of staff and their real range of experience, then on the technical and administrative capacities of the structures requesting authorisation. Indeed the preventive archaeology field as regulated by the heritage code implies not only recognised scientific skills in preventive archaeology matters but also skills and experience specific to the technical management of escavations (e.g. safety imperatives). This technical management can have significant impact on the execution of escavations and on their scientific input. Of the requests submitted since 2003, a certain number were at first rejected with administrative departments providing their help and council to submitters, advising them as well as possible on team composition and finalising submissions. The CNRA is trying at present to produce a document for future preventive archaeology operators that will make it possible to better define the contents of submissions for authorisation according to acquired experience. Operator / year Nov Total Requests Approved Requests Approved Requests Approved Local authorities Private operators Total Table 3: Distribution of authorisations granted upon advice from the CNRA ( ) Source: DAPA 20

23 Report to Parlement Interregional Archaeology Research Commissions (CIRA) Interregional Archaeology Research Commissions, assessment and scientific proposal agencies serving closely with each of the regional prefects, were established in 1994 with a view to examining archaeology research-related issues that depend on their geographical location. They are therefore capable of formulating an opinion intended to help in preparing prefect decisions issuing from the preventive archaeology field but also scheduled archaeology. In this context the commissions do the following: they examine operation projects from the prescriptive stage by regional archaeology departments they can ensure scientific expertise missions as part of current operations and with a view to clarifying the scientific control exercised on operators by the regional archaeology departments they carry out scientific assessment of diagnostic and excavation reports they issue matching opinions prior to any decision to withdraw excavation authorisation CIRA Sessions Number Days Diagnostics Preventive excavations Numbers of cases examined Scheduled Publication / operations Distribution Misc. information West North-Central East East-Central Southeast Southwest Total , ,469 Table 4: The activity of interrengional archaeology research commissions ( ) Source: DAPA / IGAPA Total Annual regional activity assessments are submitted to the commissions, e.g. programmes for the coming years, and they formulate all useful opinions and proposals about the whole of archaeological activity, including for scientific studies and publications. 21

24 Preventive archaeology With a four-year term of office, each commission, presided by the region's prefect with assistance from an archaeology general inspector, is composed of members selected for their acknowledged scientific skills. These members come from the CNRS, universities, government departments in charge of archaeology, local authority archaeological departments, volunteer archaeologists and the INRAP or authorised private operators, for a representation that takes into account the balance between the various scientific disciplines that are part of archaeology. In this sense, the CIRAs are the venue where all the scientific players in archaeology are represented so as to cover the whole archaeological field and give direction to field research as part of a collegiate assessment procedure, as well as publishing their findings according to the priority pathways as defined in the national plan and adjusted to interregional and regional plans Local authority archaeological departments At first linked to carrying out preventive archaeology operations via specific agreements in the system established by the law of January 17th, 2001, the archaeological departments created by municipalities, municipality groups, départements and regions have seen their role as preventive archaeology operators reinforced and clarified by the law of August 1st, Location / Year Nov Total Requests Approved Requests Approved Requests Approved Alsace Aquitaine Bourgogne (Burgundy) Bretagne (Brittany) Centre Franche-Comté Ile-de-France Languedoc-Roussillon Lorraine Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Haute-Normandie 1 1 Pays de la Loire (Loire region) Picardie Poitou-Charentes PACA (Provence-Alps-Côte d'azur) Rhône-Alpes Guadeloupe 1 1 All regions Table 5: Approval of the archaeological departments of local governments according to their geographical locations ( ) Source: DAPA With public operators henceforth put at the same level as INRAP, local government archaeological departments, having requested and received authorisation, exercise the following skills: 22

25 Report to Parlement in diagnostics, they can decide to carry out all the operations prescribed by the SRAs in their area for an extendable three-year period. The portion of tax that is attached to the corresponding developments is in this cased reimbursed they are also led to compete for doing the archaeological excavations in like manner to INRAP or approved private operators 2.4. The French National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (INRAP) The purpose of the National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (INRAP), an administrative public agency established by the law of January 17th, 2001, is to carry out preventive archaeology operations everywhere in France as prescribed by the government departments in charge of archaeology. Initially holding a "monopolistic" position for carrying out this brief, since the law of August 1st, 2003, it now shares the local government archaeology departments and private law facilities with the other players approved for preventive archaeology. Besides its operational function, INRAP also handles the scientific use of its activities and the dissemination of their findings, in particular as part of co-operation agreements reached with public research bodies or higher education. It also contributes to teaching, cultural dissemination and the enhancement of archaeology. To carry out its missions, the agency adopted a devolved organisation structured by eight interregional departments, which rely on a web of seventuy archaeological bases, functional structures at the départements level. By 2005 the agency, with a budget of 118m, employed a total of 1,741 agents (full-time equivalent), 1,390 of whom are standing staff and 351 are under limited-term contracts. These agents are seconded according to the agency's various activities: the "operational" activity includes agents assigned to carrying out preventive archaeology operations the "functional" activity corresponds to the agents assigned to administrative tasks the "research" activity concerns the use and enhancement of the findings of preventive archaeology operations carried out by the agency the "services" activity includes specialised work carried out by the agency upon orders of other bodies such as the regional archaeology departments, for example ETP / Activities Indefinite contract Fixed-term contract Total Number % Number % Number % Operational 1, , Functional Research Service Total staff 1, ,

26 Preventive archaeology Table 6: The distribution of agents by INRAP according to the agency's various activities in 2005 (distribution elements as of 31/08/05) Source: IGF-IGAAC-CGPC according to data supplied by INRAP 2.5. Private operators The law of August 1st, 2003 opened up preventive archaeology excavations to a supervised competitive system. Approved and supervised by the government's devolved departments in charge of archaeology, excavations could henceforth be conducted by private operators and would be funded at market prices under certain conditions as follows: the private operator must have previously received approval guaranteeing that their standing staff are duly qualified in archaeological and heritage conservation matters, as well as possessing administrative, technical and financial capacity to realise preventive archaeology operations likely to be entrusted to them. Approval is granted for a five-year period that is extendable under the same conditions as the initial approval as part of the operation in which he or she is likely to intervene, the private operator must not be directly or indirectly dependent on the developer or one of his stakeholders preventive excavations are subject to a contract between the developer and the operator, specifying the conditions of the latter's intervention. The government departments in charge of archaeology monitor this contract's conformity to the specifications that either do or don't authorise the start of the operation on this basis. Location / Year Nov Total Requests Approved Requests Approved Requests Approved Alsace Aquitaine Bourgogne Ile-de-France 1 1 Languedoc-Roussillon Midi-Pyrénées Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Pays de la Loire Rhône-Alpes 1 1 Foreign Total regions Table 7: Approval of private operators according to their geographic location ( ) Source: DAPA 2.6. The CNRS and the University 24

27 Report to Parlement Although they are not operators as such, the CNRS and the University are essential players in preventive archaeology through their actions of enhancing the findings of diagnostic and excavation operations and in restoring them, especially by way of structures and programmes participating in research such as mixed research units (UMRs), collective research projects (PCRs) and collective research actions (ACRs). Moreover because of their particular scientific expertise they may be called upon to supervise preventive archaeology operations through agreements for collaborating with certain operators such as INRAP. 25

28

29 Report to Parlement 3. Funding 3.1. The fiscal apparatus The preventive archaeology tax mechanisms and its various changes The fiscal set-up of the law of January 17th, 2001 established a funding system completely reliant on taxes The law of January 17th, 2001 provided for preventive archaeology's funding through two taxes: one for diagnostics and the other for excavations The mechanism for funding preventive archaeology introduced by the law of January 17th, 2001, relies on the principle of a double tax the generating fact of which takes form in promulgating prescriptive intervention by the appropriate government departments. The first tax deals with diagnostic operations, while the second the excavations themselves. The tax rates, the calculation methods of which differ for each of the two taxes, are set so as to introduce a certain proportionality between the amounts levied and the harm done to archaeological heritage. There is thus a direct link between the archaeological operation carried out and the tax levied for it. Concerning the diagnostics tax, a distinction between urban and rural areas was judged insufficiently relevant by lawmakers who retained a single base, founded on the surface area of the development project which is multiplied by a single rate, set at 0.32 per square metre and indexed on the evolution of the building cost index. This simple and one-off calculating method allows developers to budgetarily forecast the cost induced by the tax in cases where the government might have to prescribe a diagnostic test on their development operations. As for calculating the tax due for carrying out preventive excavations, it obeys two distinct equations so as to take the specificity of the works carried out in rural (non-stratified sites) and urban (stratified sites) environments into account, which bring into play goals, methods and means of different natures: for the stratified sites, the calculation equation introduces a rate per excavated square metre based on the respective thickness of the archaeological sediment and the layers of rubble to remove before reaching it for the non-stratified sites, the rate per excavated square metre is calculated by taking the average number of archaeological vestiges of a simple and/or complex nature into account per hectare as defined by the diagnostic operations. The parameters for calculating the tax due for preventive excavations, i.e. the assessment base, are set by the government departments in charge of archaeology with the INRAP being, for its part and on its own behalf, in charge of liquidating and collecting the tax. 27

30 Preventive archaeology The finance law for 2003 reduced the global product of the preventive archaeology tax by 25%, thus destablising the public agency's funding Highlighting that the preventive archaeology tax introduced by the law of January 17th, 2001, levied an intolerable load regarding the financial balance of development projects, the Assemblée Nationale voted for an amendment that reduced the global yield of the tax by 50% (art. 59, quotar). This article was removed by the Senate when it voted on it. The joint commission of both houses, convened after a first readiong of the draft finances law, reached agreement on December 12th, 2002 to maintain the RAP reduction by the Assemblée Nationale while bringing it to 25% of the overall yield. The sharp reduction of the yield from the preventive archaeology tax threw the public agency into a financial crisis in the earliest months of 2003, thereby denying it the ability to engage in a large part of preventive archaeology operations, and it provoked intolerable waits for developers The reform introduced by the law of August 1st, 2003, maintained a fiscal provision to fund diagnostic operations and supply an equalisation fund while basing it on a broader assessment base. In this reformed system, the purpose of the preventive archaeology tax is to both fund diagnostics and subsidise part of the excavations with the national fund for preventive archaeology (FNAP). It constitutes an essential contribution for protecting buried national heritage and developing knowledge, compiled to a great degree by preventive archaeology operations. The amount of this tax is equal to the product of the land's surface area (or the surface area of land for farming buildings) by a sum of 0.32 euros indexed on the construction cost index. Where applicable the amount of tax is reduced from the amount of exemptions resulting from the building of state-funded rental housing. It is due when work affects the underground: development operations, construction, infrastructure installations or scouring. The generating event is either an administrative authorisation (or declaration) or a voluntary request (a voluntary request for doing a diagnosis, DVRD) pertaining to a terrain or land occupied by works. It is all of this terrain or the works that are used as a basis for calculating the tax. The tax is applicable only once to a plot of land. With a single plot of land holding several successive operations only the first can be taxed (e.g. the case of mixed-use development zones and housing developments where development and construction succeed one another). The tax is only due for operations with significant impact. 3,000 sq m is set by law as the land surface threshold under which the tax is not due. The law also stipulates that exemptions from the tax are possible if the following are carried out: public rental housing, housing built by a physical person for personal use and groundwork. Tax assessment, scheduling and collection operations are entrusted to the government's devolved departments. Liquidation and scheduling are the responsibility of the following: 28

31 Report to Parlement the département prefect for works subject to authorisation or a foregoing declaration by applying the urban planning code the regional prefect in all other cases The tax is collected by the Treasury since the public agency is no longer in a monopolistic position, including as part of its operational activities that derive from the notion of being in the general public interest and are shared with the other local government archaeological departments The law of August 1st, 2003 adjusted the tax-assessment base for the category of improvements subject to authorisation in the name of the urban-planning code The provisions of the law of August 1st, 2003, which stipulated that the tax calculated on the surface area of the land unit (all adjoining plots belong to the same owner) encompassing the development, quickly led to emitting tax demands, the amounts of which proved to have nothing in common with the size of the projects that were generating them. The law of August 9th, 2004, for supporting consumption and investment thus made the preventive archaeology tax system evolve on several points concerning the assessment base for those cases relating to the urban-planning code, the liquidation and scheduling of which were entrusted to the DDEs: the RAP, due for development projects covered by the urban-planning code, was henceforth calculated in a way compartable to the local infrastructure tax with the application of a 0.3% rate to the real estate values defined in article 1585 D of the general tax code comprehensive planning areas, until then processed for the RAP by the DRACs, were no longer taxable as such and were subject to the preventive archaeology tax for each urban-planning authorisation that results from it. The tax-calculation base was entrusted to the DDEs the building of ground-level parking lots henceforth became part of a category of taxable works for the preventive archaeology tax. The fiscal processing of this new case category was also entrusted to the DDEs tax payers assessed under the provisions of the previous system had the possibility of asking to benefit from a recalculation of their tax along lines of these new provisions 29

32 Preventive archaeology The yield from the preventive archaeology tax The tax as established by the law of January 17th, 2001: a tax collected by INRAP In all 115.5m euros were collected in four financial years from 2002 to 2005 by INRAP for the tax as it was established by the law of January 17th, 2001 and according to the methods proper to this first fiscal system. More specifically the yield from financial years 2002 and 2003, during which this fiscal system was applied, on its own came to 67m euros. Whether for diagnostics or excavations, the collections observed after the fact corresponded to the operations prescribed between February 1st, 2002 and November 1st, 2003, but the field work was done later. The emission of tax income titles was deferred in consequence. RAP law of Total Amount raised 16,056,799 51,792,129 42,131,839 5,586, ,567,352 Table 8: Amounts collected for the preventive archaeology tax established by the law of January 17th, 2001 (data as of 14/12/05) Source: INRAP The amount of money collected in 2004 (42m euros) was therefore linked to the presence of excavation operations for which an annual slippage phenomenon is more frequently observed between prescription and the effective work in the field The tax as appended by the laws of August 1st, 2003 and August 9th, 2004: a yield collected by public accountants based on scheduling carried out by the DDEs and the DRACs The portion of the tax scheduled by the DDEs In all, the yield from the tax scheduled by the DDEs and levied by public accountants for collection amounted in 2004 and 2005 to 52.3m euros for a total approaching 14,000 certificates. equipement Total No. of certifs. Amount No. of certifs. Amount No. of certifs. Amount Levied 4,428 42,271,549 9,418 10,066,286 13,846 52,337,835 Collection 1,749 8,625,646 4,365 16,583,552 6,114 25,209,198 Table 9: State of levying and collection of tax certificates issued by the DDEs on the basis of authorisations obtained in the name of the urbandevelopment code (data as of 20/11/05) Source: MINEFI-DGCP In greater detail, there were considerable disparities between 2004 and 2005; for the latter year the DDEs issued 53% additional certificates for an overall tax yield of under 77%. This situation was in particular due to two related factors: 30

33 Report to Parlement the very complexity of urban-development operations led the DDEs having to observe rights to exemptions upon claims from tax payers that were imposed on the overall yield of new levies it is also the result of the priority acceptance by public accountants of taxation issued consecutively to a claim so as to limit the contentious field between the tax payer and the fiscal administration. This point should lead to relativising the real weight of the exemptions as it might be assessed from data relating to the levying and collection of the RAP (table 9) Moreover the observable difference in 2005 between the amounts levied and the amounts collected (6.5m euros) results from carrying forward part of the missing amount to be collected on the certificates issued in Starting in June of 2005 a few DDEs delegated their know-how in matters of the liquidation and scheduling of the RAP to certain muncipalities, as such is the case for urban-planning taxes. Still marginal, the yield of the tax garnered by this means at the end of Nobvember, 2005, represented only 3.1% of the balance of the schedules carried out by all departments in the Infrastructure Ministry for that same period, or a total of a little over 300,000 euros scheduled for 71 certificates issued. Local govt'ts No. of certifs. Amount Levied ,815 Collected ,361 Table 10: State of the levy and collection of tax certificates issued by local governments based on the authorisations obrtained in the name of the urban-development code (data as of 30/11/05) Source: MINEFI-DGCP The portion of the tax scheduled by the DRACs The 2003 system of tax yield Coming into force on November 1st, 2003, the fiscal amendment introduced by the law of August 1st, 2003 only started to be applied by the DRACs in the first months of For this entire financial year the overall yield from cases managed by the DRACs came to 9.3m euros, which is extremely paltry given INRAP's funding needs (40m euros) and the portion that had been estimated for the DRACs (about 25m euros) taken from the first amount. This deficit in 2004 can be explained by several reasons: the prerequisite estimation of the portion of cases processed by the DRACs was intended for a fiscal system that reached its full load, which couldn't be expected for the balance sheet of the first financial year 1 Concerning the analysis of preventive archaeology tax collection, refer to 3.2 "INRAP's financial situation" as well as annex [x]. 31

34 Preventive archaeology The system's full load could not be reached for the first year all the more for the fact that the DRACs found themselves faced with the assimilation of a new profession and the implementation of new networks work on a new dedicated computer programme, although begun in the first quarter of 2004 and conducted at a forced march, could not be translated into effective deployment before the end of the first quarter of Reform to the tax system introduced by the law of August 9th, 2004 not having changed the ways of calculating taxation for the cases whose processing was done by the DRACs in contrast to those entrusted to the DDEs, tax payers enjoyed a right of option that enabled them to choose the old or the new way of calculating, in 2005 there was a natural scheduling forward transfer of 10.3m euros that corresponded to the processing of generating facts before August 12th, 2004, the date when new fiscal provisions came into force. Region / Year Combined Alsace 59,624 59,624 Auvergne 927, ,628 Bourgogne 750, ,805 Bretagne 303, ,445 Centre 1,715,625 1,715,625 Champagne-Ardenne 449,164 10, ,491 Corse 39,480 39,480 Franche-Comté 3,092,720 3,092,720 Ile-de-France 1,781, ,437 1,984,656 Languedoc-Roussillon 59,712 1,083,395 1,143,107 Limousin 58,513 58,513 Lorraine 707, ,369 1,056,751 Midi-Pyrénées 53,401 53,401 Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1,691, ,677 1,379,145 Basse-Normandie 588, ,180 Haute-Normandie 499,287 21, ,931 Pays de la Loire 1,486, ,817 2,331,406 Picardie 1,132,096 52,977 1,185,073 Poitou-Charentes 788, , ,270 PACA 303, , ,646 Rhône-Alpes 423,542 59, ,621 Total 9,322,723 10,324,795 19,647,518 Table 11: Amounts scheduled by the DRACs for the tax created by the law of August 1st, 2003 (data as of 31/12/05) Source: DAPA/RAP software. The size of the scheduling carried out by the DRACs in 2005 on the basis of the fiscal system of the law of 2003 therefore corresponded essentially to a clearing of the backlog of cases received at the end of 2003 and 2004 and not dealt with in that period. For almost all of the DRACs this tax system should no longer occasion the establishment of new initial taxes for Despite that, it does not imply possible such demands by tax payers as to generate operations of exemptions, supplements or complements on projects taxed in 2004 and

35 Report to Parlement This is what can be observed in 2005 for certain regions (e.g. Nord-Pas-de-Calais in particular), the low, even negative, tax yield of which corresponds more to a significant, even preponderant, proportion of exemptions than the scheduling of new taxes. The tax yield as appended by the law of Aughust 9th, 2004 From the point of view of the overall results and despite good involvement by the DRACs in 2005 (cf. below), it is observable that the overall yield of the scheduling for 2004 and 2005 was only slight higher (22.9m euros) than that seen for the same period for the tax as it was established by the law of August 1st, 2003 (19m euros). This disparity results in particular from the new fiscal provisions concerning mixed activity zones, henceforth levied by the DDEs for each of the building permits and no longer by the DRACs based on their overall surface area in the previous fiscal mechanism. Region / Year Combined Alsace 22,144 22,144 Aquitaine 203, ,645 Auvergne 29,927 29,927 Bourgogne 1,074,529 1,074,529 Bretagne 147, ,309 Centre 279,326 5,459,155 5,738,481 Franche-Comté 751, ,049 Ile-de-France 390,461 4,363,660 4,754,121 Languedoc-Roussillon 901, ,578 Limousin 163, ,307 Lorraine 197, ,585 Midi-Pyrénées 681, ,026 Nord-Pas-de-Calais 551,925 1,584,444 2,136,369 Basse-Normandie 1,180,736 1,180,736 Haute-Normandie 139, ,858 Pays de la Loire 1,051,066 1,624,614 2,675,680 Picardie 166, , ,287 Poitou-Charentes 674, ,475 PACA 12, , ,401 Rhône-Alpes 252, ,681 Total 2,451,100 20,544,088 22,995,188 Table 12: Tax amounts scheduled by the DRACs as it was appended by the law of August 9th, 2004 (data as of 31/12/05) Source: DAPA / RAP Software The disparities observed between the combined yield for 2004 (2.4m euros) and that of 2005 (20.5m euros) was due primarily to the fact that the 2004 financial year was not a full year, as the tax reform did not enter into force until the middle of August. Moreover, as was shown for the tax yield attached to the system of the law of August 1st, 2003 (cf. above), the DRACs encountered technical and organisational difficulties which, for the mostpart, were resolved in It is worth noting in this regard that the rising charges of scheduling carried out by the DRACs between 2004 and 2005 made very clear progress (a ratio of 1 to 10 between 2004 and 2005), 33

36 Preventive archaeology which particularly indicated the increased capacties of these departments to take on the fiscal assignements entrusted to them by law. The tax established by the law of 2003 and amended in 2004: a fiscal system that progressed slowly but with good participation by the DRACs in 2005 The combined data of taxes scheduled for the two systems considered for 2004 and 2005 show beyond doubt that the DRACS mobilised strongly in 2005 after an initial year marked by the assimilation of new procedures. Region,/,Year Combined Alsace 81,768 81,768 Aquitaine 203, ,645 Auvergne 957, ,555 Bourgogne 1,825,334 1,825,334 Bretagne 450, ,754 Centre 279,326 7,174,780 7,454,106 Champagne-Ardenne 449,164 10, ,491 Corse 39,480 39,480 Franche-Comté 3,843,769 3,843,769 Ile-de-France 2,171,680 4,567,097 6,738,777 Languedoc-Roussillon 59,712 1,984,973 2,044,685 Limousin 221, ,820 Lorraine 707, ,954 1,254,336 Midi-Pyrénées 734, ,427 Nord-Pas-de-Calais 2,243,747 1,271,767 3,515,514 Basse-Normandie 1,768,916 1,768,916 Haute-Normandie 499, , ,789 Pays de la Loire 2,537,655 2,469,431 5,007,086 Picardie 1,298, ,188 2,160,360 Poitou-Charentes 788, ,123 1,592,745 PACA 315, , ,047 Rhône-Alpes 423, , ,302 Total 11,773,823 30,868,883 42,642,706 Table 13: Tax amounts scheduled by the DRACs for all systems combined in 2004 and 2005 (data as of 31/12/05) Source: DAPA/RAP software. The overall yield of the scheduling thus made significant progress, rising from 11.8m euros in 2004 to 30.8m euros by the end of December 2005, for a combined total of 42.6m euros for these two financial years. This signficiant progression was particularly due to the results of the joint work by the architecture and heritage department and the general administrative department of the Ministry of Culture, which translated into the availability of tools, procedures and methodological orientations as well as by the organisation of training courses and a network of referents for the agents in charge of liquidating and scheduling the tax in the DRACs. 34

37 Report to Parlement Of the overall yield scheduled by the DRACs since 2004, the total amount of the tax collected came to 21m euros by the end of November, 2005 and according to data from the general public accounting department of the MINEFI (Ministry of the Economy and Finances) 2. DRAC Total No. of certifs. Amount No. of certifs. Amount No. of certifs. Amount Levied ,949, ,912,174 1,156 36,861,468 Collected 220 5,375, ,675, ,051,281 Table 14: State of the levy and collection of tax certificates issued by the DRACs (data as of 30/11/05) Source: MINEFI-DGCP The [French] National Fund for Preventive Archaeology The establishment of the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology derives from the new provisions relating to the funding of preventive archaeology introduced by the law of August 1st, 2003 Before the law of January 17th, 2001 came into force, the departments of the Ministry of Culture in charge of archaeology had the possibility of providing subsidies to developers from a dedicated budget line and based on a convention when the forecasted cost of preventive archaeology excavations they had to fund showed such a payment load as to endanger the budgetary balance of the developmental operations under consideration. This facility was essentially mobilised for the benefit of assisted public-housing projects and for physical people building for themselves. With the preventive archaeology funding mechanism established by the law of January 17th, 2001 relying wholly on the tax, the facility of providing subsidies to limit the financial load weighing on certain development projects was ended. In compensation, legislators exempted developments by physical people for their own ends and the building of government assisted public rental-housing from paying the preventive archaeology tax. The exemptions granted by the law proved to not always ensure the principle of reconciliation between the interests represented by the preservation of archaeological heritage and economic development. Which is why the law of August 1st, 2003, established an equalisation fund dedicated to attributing subsidies as part of carrying out preventive archaeology excavations as a result of developments not benefiting from one of the various exemption systems. A National Fund for Preventive Archaeology intended to ensure the levy and provision of subsidies to developers, under cerrtain conditions The National Fund for Preventive Archaeology was therefore endowed with two functions: ensuring the acceptance of the operational costs of preventive excavations done on the construction of housing benefitting from dispensation from the RAP providing subsidies under certain conditions to the other developers who would not be able to bear the financial burden of preventive excavations 2 Concerning the analysis of preventive archaeology tax collection, refer to 3.2 "INRAP's financial situation" as well as annex 2. 35

38 Preventive archaeology For this second function, which legislators wished to see supervised, A "National Fund for Preventive Archaeology Commission" was established, the brief of which was to establish the criteria of eligibility that the government departments of archaeology have to apply when attributing eventual subsidies. The commission was composed of seventeen standing members along the following lines: two representatives from Parliament a representative of the ministry in charge of the budget a representative of the ministry in charge of infrastructure a representative of the ministry in charge of research two mayors named upon a proposal by the French Mayors' Association a General Council president named upon a proposal by the French Assembly of the départements a Regional Council president named upon a proposal by the French Regions Association four representatives of public or private persons subject to the preventive archaeology tax, named by the ministry in charge of culture upon a proposal by the minister in charge of industry, the minister in charge of housing and the minister in charge of infrastructure four persons qualified in archaeological matters named by the minister in charge of culture upon a proposal by the minister in charge of research Legislators, moreover, wished to avoid attaching the portion of the tax yield for the FNAP to income from the government budget and placed under the chapter of the Ministry of Culture so as to preserve it from any risk of budgetary regulation. Entries on the fund having nonetheless to be done by a public accountant, this was established for practical reasons in a special INRAP account. The public agency that acts as a simple manager thus does not have any discretionary rights either for administering the fund or establishing criteria and the decisions on allocating subsidies. Nor can it redeploy any possible credits that may not have been used for the benefit of its own budget. The commission of the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology was established in 2005 with a brief to supervise the subsidy facility by defining the allocation criteria The FNAP commission was implemented late and with difficulty due both to the provisions involved in the decree for applying the law and the procedures for designating its members by the various ministerial departments and bodies concerned. Although establishing the commission had been planned, the final arbitration on the provision concerned by the decree applying the law, which introduced the naming of substitute members, obliged the Ministry of Culture to once again refer to all the authorities and bodies 36

39 Report to Parlement concerned. In fact these new nominations extended from June, 2004, to January, The make-up of the commission was finalised in a decree on March 5th, 2005 in the French Journal Officiel. Presided over by Mr. Robert Heimlich, mayor of the Forstfeld municipality in eastern France, the commission met twice on May 19th, 2005 and July 12th, 2005, meetings where the criteria of elgibility to subsidies paid by the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology were adopted. As a prerequisite to adopting the criteria, the commission recalled the terms of article L of the heritage code, according to which "interventions by the fund are intended to facilitate reconciliation between the preservation of archaeology heritage and national development, especially rural development". For the commission only archaeological excavations that are done as part of development projects, the ends of which are in the public interest, are eligible for subsidies. The commission thus adopted the following four criteria: the taking into account of the archaeological operation's impact on the development project's economic balance and thus, on its feasability the localisation of the development in areas benefitting from public funds the developer's efforts to limit the impact of the development on archaeological remains The discovery of exceptional importance occurring during a preventive excavation, generating surplus expenditure of the archaeological dig. The commission stressed the time-frames relating to the processing of subsidy requests by proposing a maximum time of two months after reception of fully completed case file. Should the file be incomplete, an additional one month could be proposed, enabling the administration to request the missing documents. Levies and subsidies: the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology financial balance sheet in 2005 At the end of 2005 the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology only enabled the granting of project levies. Processing subsidy requests in particular couldn't be implemented because of the delays due to setting up the FNAP commission. This arrangement was to be completed by adopting a joint decree by the ministers in charge of culture and the budget establishing the contents of subsidy request files. The arrangements relating to project acceptance came into force when the decree of January, 2005 was adopted, which set the contents of project acceptance request files. Henceforth the regional prefects could deliver the decrees to recipients setting the amount of the acceptance of the excavation costs, enabling the payment of these approvals by INRAP, manager of the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology. On December 12th, 2005 the FNAP was provisioned by the preventive archaeology tax with 10,653,428 euros. On the same date, it made it possible to fund 51 archaeological excavations for a total of 10,398,521 euros, leaving a positive balance of 254,907 euros. In this regard however it must be noted that at the end of October, 2005, the data relating to the tax showed that there were still some 30 million euros to be collected, including 10 million for the FNAP. 37

40 Preventive archaeology Applicant Number Amount Private individual 8 952, Public housing office or 12 like dep't , Mixed Activity/ Subdivider , Total 51 10,927, Table 15: Breakdown of the project levied (in euros) according to the type of developer involved (as of 12/12/05) Source: INRAP Table 15 identifies three categories of developers. It is worth recalling that if the project acceptances are limited to only two kinds of development, there are several categories of developers that may be recipients. In 2003 legislators specified that construction of such housing opens up the right to acceptance, including if it is done as part of a mixed-activity zone or a housing development. So when a mixed-activity zone developer or a subdivider dedicates all or part of their plots to be sold to individual purchasers or public housing offices to build housing, they benefit from the project acceptance of the excavation carried out on these lands. In fact we saw that 63% of the operations having been accepted for exemptions were requested by mixed-activity developers or housing-estate developers. Of these FNAP recipients, a third were local governments while two thirds were promoters building housing estates The computer software for help in liquidating and scheduling the RAP by the DRACs So as to facilitate the operations of liquidation and scheduling entrusted by the law to regional departments of cultural affairs, the department of general administration and the department of architecture and heritage of the Ministry of Culture decided jointly to provide the DRACs with software offering aid to liquidation and scheduling operations of the preventive archaeology tax as well as monitoring corresponding taxation cases. From specification to effective deployment twelve months were needed for implementation Specifications for this new software were elaborated in March, 2004 by the DAPA. It was done in close co-operation with the general accounting department of the MINEFI which validated the general functioning principles of the software, the calculating methods and the shape of exit products (taxation notification and release notes) issued for the benefit of public-sector accountants for collection from tax payers. While waiting for the software, the DAPA placed at the DRACs' disposal two electronic platforms with an initial aid in liquidating and scheduling the preventive archaeology tax, making it possible to harmonise issued certificates and notifications: the models of release notes to general treasuries including functions for automatically calculating the amount of the tax 38

41 Report to Parlement a control panel recapitulating the tax files processed and the scheduled amounts so as to ensure the forecasting visibility of the ability to fund INRAP and the FNAP. Programming the software was awarded after tender offers to an outside service provider and entered the production phase in June of After the test phases, the new software was delivered at the end of March, 2005 and deployed in the DRACs in early April, 2005, i.e. twelve months after the specifications began to be elaborated. Simultaneously with making the software available, the DAPA and the DGCP gave joint training sessions in May and June of 2005, intended for those agents in charge of liquidating and scheduling the tax in the regional cultural affairs departments. The purpose and functionning of the Preventive Archaeology Tax software (RAP) This software's sole purpose it to process fiscal cases, the liquidation and scheduling of which are entrusted to the regional prefect. It covers the following: entering the information needed to liquidate these cases calculating the tax by taking into account, where needed, the applicable exemption system the scheduling and issuance of tax notification and release notes to the general treasury case follow-up after their scheduling, in particular the processing of possible exemptions, complements, supplements, transfers and cancellations with the issuance of related notifications and release notes statistical functions (regional and national recapitulatory conditions) 39

42 Preventive archaeology Figure 16: Screen shot of statistics in the RAP software Source: DAPA/RAP software The cases resulting in liquidation and scheduling in the software break down into three major classes depending on the kind of transfer: case appraised by the DRAC (SRA) for archaeology at the request-application stage cases never having been appraised by the departments of the DRAC, coming as a tax generator request for diagnostics Liquidation can be done in one go or can lead to several parts. A case can only be entered into the software if it is to lead to an immediate or deferred liquidation. 40

43 Report to Parlement Figure 17: Screen shot of a taxation case follow-up with the print-out of tax notification Source: DAPA/RAP software Finally, the software enables a consultation of the state of liquidation and scheduling carried out by the DRACs at a national and real time level. This steering tool thus authorises a certain forecast of income generated by this part of the tax for INRAP's benefit. From a technical point of view the software relies on a database that records all elements of tax cases (administrative co-ordinates of developments and taxpayers, surface areas, the dates and references of tax generation, etc.). Centralised at the department of computer systems in the Ministry of Culture, the database is used via a simple Internet browser with each authorised user logging on to a single address and owning a profile enabling them to carry out certain defined operations INRAP's financial situation The job of working out successive INRAP budgets was disturbed in particular by the numerous amendments added on since

44 Preventive archaeology Budget Budgets worked out under the law of January 17th, 2001 As mentioned above, When the decree concerning the administrative and financial procedures in preventive archaeology came out on January 16th, 2002, as well as the one signalling the public creation of INRAP, that the law of January 17th, 2001 entered its truly applicable phase on February 1st, The INRAP budget was thus established for 11 months in that financial year financial year Initial Budget Disbursed Initial Budget Disbursed OPERATIONS Expenditures Products Personnel Subsidies Operations Other private resources (AFAN invoicing) Tax Other 3.0 TOTAL TOTAL Surplus 1.0 Deficit 3.5 INVESTMENT Jobs Resources Insufficient self-financing 4.2 Self-financing capacity 1.6 Tangible and intangible capital acquisition Subsidy TOTAL TOTAL 1,6 Input to working capital Withdrawals from working capital 4.9 Table 18: INRAP planning budget and its state of disbursement (in millions of euros) for the 2002 financial year Source: INRAP In 2002 the spread observed between "done" and the "initial budget" was due in part to the crisis caused by the law of January 17th, The yield from the preventive archaeology tax in particular proved too low to ensure the funding of field operations and did not enable INRAP to conduct its budget according to its forecasts or ensure its cash-flow. It should, moreover, be noted that while waiting for the enforcement of the 2001 law and upon a request by the Ministry of the Economy, Finances and Industry, the idea of an advance from the treasury of 23m euros to meet the first expenditure commitments was preferred to establishing an initial working capital fund. This advance was supposed to be repaid by the end of Given the serious cashflow and financial crisis undergone by the agency, this repayment could not be done, for it would have led to the agency's totally blocking up financial year Initial Budget Disbursed Initial Budget Disbursed OPERATIONS Expenditures Products Personnel Subsidies

45 Report to Parlement Operations Other private resources (AFAN invoicing) Tax Other TOTAL TOTAL Surplus Deficit 2.0 INVESTMENT Jobs Resources Insufficient self-financing 2.2 Self-financing capacity 0.3 Tangible and intangible capital acquisition Subsidy TOTAL TOTAL 0.3 Input to working capital Withdrawals from working capital 2.6 Table 19: INRAP planning budget and state of disbursement (in millions of euros) for financial year 2003 Source: INRAP The task of working out a planning budget for financial year 2003 was especially touchy in a context where the planned arrangement could not reach its cruising speed and was in sync with legislative reformulation. Coming fully into force on November 1st, 2003, the law of August 1st, 2003 had no budetary impact on financial year It was therefore the provisions of the 2001 law made worse at the budgetary level by the uncompensated drop of 25% of the tax that were applied, thus increasing the deficit. It was hard to estimate given the following: the lack of all hindsight on an entirely new fiscal system the difficulty of classifying operations according to whether they depended on the initial 2001 arangements or the corrected arrangement following the 25% fall in the tax the significant slow-down in the agency's expenses to limit the deficit and which was mostly translated by a fall in the number of fixed-term contracts In the end the combined deficit for 2002 and 2003 came to 39m euros. To enable the agency to carry out its missions and not increase the timeframes for intervention even more, the Ministry of Culture and Communication was obliged to pay an exceptional subsidy of 27.5m euros to partially make up for the tax shortfall. The disparity between budgetary execution and planning has been reduced in relation to 2002 but has not yet reached its optimum. INRAP's financial situation and cashflow have not enabled the agency to reimburse the 23m euros advanced by the Treasury in

46 Preventive archaeology Budgets established under the law of August 1st, 2003 The expected effects of the new law of August 1st, 2003 were taken into account when working out INRAP's 2004 budget. In terms of income, the transition between the two legislative positions increased the number of the agency's funding resources, which complicated the follow-up of their management. This was especially true for the preventive archaeology tax since in relationship with the law of August 1st, 2001, INRAP lost its role as both liquidator and collector of the tax, which was given to the DRACs, DDEs and public sector accountants. These latter have one month following the collection of the tax to pay 30% of the amount to the FNAP and the operators involved. According to the financial forecasts that helped in formulating the law, the expected amount from the preventive archaeology tax was supposed to be about 60m euros, nearly 20m euros of which for the FNAP and 40.7m euros for the then sole operator, INRAP financial year Initial Budget Disbursed Initial Budget Disbursed OPERATIONS Expenditures Products Personnel Subsidy Operations Other private resources (AFAN invoicing and digs invoicing law ) 2001 tax law tax law Other TOTAL TOTAL Surplus Deficit 12.3 INVESTMENT Jobs Resources Insufficient self-financing 11.5 Self-financing capacity 0,7 Tangible and intangible capital acquisitions Subsidy TOTAL Other 26.8 OPERATIONS TOTAL Input to working capital 14.5 Withdrawals from working capital 0.3 Table 20: INRAP planning budget and state of disbursment (in millions of euros) for financial year 2004 Source: INRAP Another significant disparity was observed between the initial planning budgets and executed budgets in 2004 in income on the 2003 tax line. As mentioned above, there are several reasons that led to this situation: the learning time by the new liquidation players (DDE, DRAC) and collection (publicsector accountants) of the procedure chains with complex methods continuing the standardising work from the 2003 law requiring the approval by several ministries 44

47 Report to Parlement the legislative amendment of the summer of 2004 which, by offering developers a right of option until the end of 2004, introduced a strong inertia effect for the preventive archaeology tax received by the DDEs the lack of computer software for the DRACs The low tax yield linked to erratic payments imposed a strong penalty on the INRAP both financially and in its cashflow. The Ministry of Culture partially relieved these difficulties by granting an exceptional subsidy of 11.5m euros in order to enable the agency to operate almost normally. In terms of jobs, a large volume had been validated by the appropriate ministries so as not to increase the timeframes for interventions for developers and to process the "stock" of archaeological prescriptions from 2002 and 2003 as a priority Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Permanent Fix-term Total Contract Contract Authorised jobs in the initial budget 1, ,760 Actual jobs 1, ,620 Table 21: Authorised jobs and actual jobs at INRAP for financial year 2004 Source: INRAP The executed budget was less than forecasted so as not to worsen the budgetary deficit while maintaining a resonable interventional level for developers financial year Initial Budget Forecasted disbursement Initial Budget Forecasted disbursement OPERATIONS Expenditures Products Personnel Subsidy Operations Other private resources (AFAN invoicing and digs invoicing law 2003) 2001 tax law tax law Other TOTAL TOTAL Surplus 0.2 Deficit INVESTMENT Jobs Resources Insufficient self-financing Self-financing capacity Tangible and intangible capital acquisitions Subsidy Repayment of financial debts 7.5 TOTAL TOTAL Input to working capital Withdrawals from working capital Table 22: INRAP's forecasted budget and forecasted disbursement (in millions of euros) for financial year 2005 (forecast issued in October, 2005) Source: INRAP 45

48 Preventive archaeology In terms of the 2005 financial year, the budgetary forecasts for the preventive archaeology tax were based on the data sent by the DGCP at the close of Moreover, following interministerial arbitration on December 22nd, 2004, the Ministry of Culture and Communications was to pay 7.5m euros in 2005 to enable INRAP to repay the first portion of the Treasury's advance of 23m euros granted in In terms of jobs, the authorised job ceiling settled at a level close to that in 2004 to enable the continuation of treating the "stock" of old prescriptions and to respond to new prescriptions, which, although their level was controlled, was to generate a lot of activity for INRAP, the lone operator with a nationwide reach capable of meeting this request FTE Permanent Contract Fixed-term Contract Total Authorised jobs in the initial budget 1, ,753 Authorised jobs after the latest amendment * 1, ,793 Forecasted disbursemets 1, ,770 * The agency was exceptionally permitted to increase its 40-job ceiling limit, fixed-term contract jobs in July, 2005, to respond to exceptional operations (A19 motorway, high-speed train, etc.) Table 23: INRAP authorised jobs and disbursement forecasts for financial year 2005 (forecast issued in October, 2005) - Source: INRAP In the end, as in 2004 the low tax yield linked to erratic payments penalised INRAP harshly at thje financial and cashflow levels. The Ministry of Culture once again granted a subsidy of 20m euros to enable continued activities. Yet a certain number of obstacles identified in 2004 were removed. The DRACs became totally operational starting in the second half of 2005, and the standardising work that was consequent to the law's coming into force was finished. These new tax difficulties were all the more surprising for the comparison between the received amounts by the DRACs, those collected by the public-sector accountants from DRAC and DDE certificates and those received by INRAP showed a very signficant disparity. Which is why a carry-over effect of the delay in receipt by INRAP, accumulated since the law's coming into force, i.e. November 1st, 2003, led to establishing an ambitious 2006 budget, as shown in the following table: 46

49 Report to Parlement 2006 financial year Initial Budget Initial Budget OPERATIONS Expenditures Products Personnel 68.8 Subsidy 0.9 Operations 48.7 Other private resources (AFAN invoicing and digs invoicing law 2003) tax law tax law 55.0 Other 2.0 TOTAL TOTAL Surplus 10.9 Deficit INVESTMENT Jobs Resources Insufficient self-financing Self-financing capacity 11.9 Tangible and intangible capital acquisition 1.8 Subsidy Repayment of financial debts 7.5 TOTAL 9.3 TOTAL 11.9 Input to working capital 2.6 Withdrawal from working capital Table 24: INRAP's forecasted budget (in millions of euros) for financial year 2006 Source: INRAP This tax inflow should enable INRAP to repay the first portion of the Treasury's advance of 23m euros. In terms of jobs, the 2005 ceiling was maintained: 1,410 permanent contracts and 343 fixed-term contracts, or a total of 1,753 jobs The state of tax repayment to INRAP and the FNAP As mentioned above, the disparity between the amounts paid by the DRACs and DDEs, those collected by the public-sector accountants and those taken in at the end of the chain by INRAP and the FNAP were sometimes considerables and explain a large part of the problems encountered by INRAP, particularly in cashflow. In 2004 a total amount of 13.6m euros was collected by INRAP and the FNAP compared to an amount collected by the public-sector accountants of 14m euros. In 2005 a total amount of 29.8m euros was collected by INRAP and the FNAP compared to the 32.3m euros collected by the public-sector accountants. 47

50 Preventive archaeology RAP levy and receipt Total Amount collected DDE sector and local gov'ts. 8,625,646 16,700,913 25,326,559 Amount collected DRAC sector 5,375,586 15,675,695 21,051,281 Total collected 14,001,232 32,376,608 46,377,840 Amount taken in INRAP 9,515,416 21,123,872 30,639,288 Amount taken in FNAP 4,078,022 8,721,548 12,799,570 Total taken-in 13,593,438 29,845,420 43,438,858 Table 25: The state of collection and cash in-flow from the 2004/2005 preventive archaeology tax (data as of 30/11/05 for the collection and 31/12/05 for cash in-flow) Source: MINEFI-DGCP/INRAP In 2006, beyond the tax related to the activity in the 2006 financial year, a "carry-on effect" of taking in the tax not occurring in 2005 for the reasons mentioned above, should carry the level of overall tax to a tellingly higher level than the two preceding financial years. With the stabilisation of the legislative system since August 2004, the disappearance of "re-calculation" operations related to the right of option opened by this law, the appropriation of the procedures by the various appraising departments and the use of stabilised computer tools in 2005, the level of collection, scheduling and cash in-flow should take a new step and approach the system's cruising speed Proposals for improving INRAP's financial situation Income The RAP accounts for over a third of total income for INRAP without the agency's ensuring its control. It is therefore necessary for it to be able to dispose of the maximum visibility on the state of collection by the DRACs and DDEs and collection by general treasuries. The frequent communication of information to INRAP, also manager of the FNAP for monitoring as closely as possible the disparity between the planning budget and spending as well as treasury receipts is vital and should be more clearly formalised. As mentioned in the audit report on the preventive archaeology tax produced in December, 2005 by the joint mission of the inspector general of finances, the general administrative and cultural affairs inspector and the general council of bridges and roadways, "the tardiness seen in tax collection, the collection ratio of which remains less than 50%, is essentially explained by the recent and complex nature of the legislation". These difficulties are decreasing as is attested to by the regular increase in the collection ratio which has reached 75% for the cases collected by the DRACs and 38% for the cases collected by the DDEs. In terms of the DRACs, the liquidation level reached should be maintained and consolidated by a completely formalised internal organisation and reinforced co-ordination with the other governmental devolved departments under the auspices of the prefect so as to facilitate the gathering of information on all kinds of works. In terms of the DDEs, henceforth removed from the "re-calculation" operations related to the right of option introduced by the law of August, 2004, it appears necessary that joint standards should be implemented between the departments appraising the urban-planning authorisations, the RAP's 48

51 Report to Parlement computer departments and the public-sector accountants. For better effectiveness, the scheduling of all case files linked to the urban-planning code should be carried out only by the DDEs and not shared with certain local governments who have expressed that desire. Moreover, the software for case appraisal should be reviewed in particular to enable a consolidated follow-up at the national level. As for general treasuries, the collection ratio of the cases liquidated by the DDEs must be improved. Moreover, a nationwide consolidation of the collection state should be carried out at least on a quarterly basis and communicated to the FNAP operators and manager. The 2001 tax share has clearly decreased in INRAP's overall income, less than 5% in 2006 as opposed to over 12% in The end of the processing of prescriptions done as part of the 2001 law on a budgetary level makes it possible to finish operations structurally in the red. The agency's budgetary security would thus be improved. Concerning excavation invoicing, a level comparable to 2005 was expected in 2006 depending on the operational activity forecast. Expenditures The budget approved for 2006 is similar to the 2005 level. The number of jobs was carried over, in particular for the fixed-term contracts. By implementing and perfecting computer management software, the agency should be better at monitoring the budgetary balance of its various activity pathways and monitor the control of its interventional costs and their uniformity throughout the country. All tools enabling the agency to improve the visibility on its operational activities (scheduling and follow-up meetings with the regional archaeological departments, monitoring tables, the complementarity and interoperationality of the Ministry of Culture's and INRAP's computer systems, etc.) shall either be developed or implemented. 49

52

53 Report to Parlement 4. The French national archaeological map In compliance with article L 522 of the heritage code, the [French] state is supposed to work out and implement the national archaeological map. This responsibility relies primarily on the devolved regional departments of the Ministry of Culture and Communications (the DRACs) and within them, on the regional departments in charge of archaeology (the SRAs). This action revolves around the following three elements: executing the archaeological map at the regional level managing scientific documentation, including excavation archives keeping the national computer software, Patriarche, up to date 4.1. The history of the national archaeological map The notion of a national archaeological map as it appears today in the heritage code issued from a semantic and conceptual evolution that relied on the thoughts of the community of archaeologists, the national and international founders of heritage rights and, since 2001, in France, debates in Parliament. Five major steps marked the evolution of the register of archaeological sites in France Recording major archaeological monuments in the first inventories starting in 1838 The need for having an inventory of national archaeological sites was expressed in a memorandum from the Ministry of the Interior in 1838, before the discipline developed throughout the 19th century. Effectively it was between 1848 and the end of the 19th century that the notions of stratigraphics and relative chronology appeared, which inspired a new scientific discipline that highlighted the place occupied by prehistory. Modelled on what existed in a few European countries, in particular in Sweden as early as the 17th century, these first inventories recorded archaeological monuments that either were still standing or ruins visible on the ground With the 1945 validation of the law of 1941, the notion of a mapped inventory of archaeological deposits and carried-out excavations came into existence An important step was taken with the decree of September 13th, 1945, that confirmed that the inventory of archaeological deposits and excavations as well as their mapping were part and parcel of the obligations of the newly created antiquities department for implementing the validated law of September 27th, It was then just a matter of an inventory form and a map on paper given to the central administration by the directors of historic and prehistoric antiquities as part of their annual activities report. They took into account not only the known monuments and the information from archaeological prospection but also the excavations that were henceforth subject to authorisation from the Minister of the Beaux-Arts and Education. 51

54 Preventive archaeology The need for a computerised inventory was confirmed in 1974, just before the big development of preventive archaeology In his report to the French President of September 30th, 1974, Jacques Soustelle, known for his archaeological work in Central America, reaffirmed this need to design a tool that would serve as an aid in decision-making for both scheduling of archaeological research in France but also for the cordonning off of certain areas with a scientific or heritage interest requiring a later study. Yet the time period and means devoted to this inventory were under-assessed, for at that time the archaeological wealth under the ground that preventive archaeology, then called "rescue archaeology", had not yet discovered. The major qualitative leap forward derived from the proposal about computerising the tool, which resulted in successive adaptations within the departments concerned with regional archaeology starting in Taking stock of archaeological heritage including an inventory and map of known sites benefiting from the results of operations connected to urban and rural development works in the 1990s The very numerous archaeological discoveries from national development projects in the 1970s and '80s reinforced the feeling of urgency in carrying out this national archaeological inventory with a view to scheduling and protecting heritage at same time as the projects were carried out. Brainstorming in France largely drew its inspirations from the European-wide exchanges on this issue by relying in particular on the "Charter for Protecting and Managing Archaeological Heritage", drawn up by ICOMOS (the International Council of Monuments and Sites). The Malta Convention borrowed many of its important principles. The higher council for archaeological research relayed these proposals to the community of archaeologists and the Minister via Professor Christian Goudineau. So starting in 1993 the localised descriptive archaeological database was linked to a geographicval information system that led to the mapping of data and spatial analysis of homogenous data The archaeological map in the heritage code In 2001 Parliament confered legislative existence on the national archaeological map, making its elaboration an essential public sector mission, the responsibility for which was incumbent on the state. Law-makers also voted for the following: the required collaboration between those public agencies with archaeological research activities and the local government departments the vital communicability of map extracts area definition from information available as decision-making aids without making the national archaeological map a definitive administrative document enforceable against third parties And lastly the dissemination in the DRACs of the new tool between 2002 and 2005 was an important step in the long process that was extended in dissemination terms by the execution and deployment of the Architecture and Heritage Atlas in

55 Report to Parlement 4.2. Defitinitions and goals of the geo-referenced archaeological database The parliamentary debates of 2001 and 2003 enabled a clarification of the nature and goals of the national archaeological map. Both its unfinished and evolving aspects and its needing to be integrated into the brainstorming on national planning were clearly recognised. This means a single inventory managed by the state relying on a permanently enriched database. It has a double purpose, i.e. as a scientific and heritage tool and as a warning instrument for all French developers A single database gathering all validated, available archaeological data, managed by the Ministry of Culture. The national archaeological map is the only database listing all of the archaeological heritage known in the entire country. The DRAC and within it the regional department in charge of archaeological management draws up a systematic stock-taking of archaeological deposits in its realm of competence and of all the kinds of authorised archaeological operations under its aegis, thus contributing to the updated national inventory. What's more, the database thus constituted benefits from an interpretation provided by professional archaeologists in their role as experts; which means that the data are validated The "map" is an inventory relying on a geo-referenced database that enables the mapping of the distribution of archaeological deposits Depending on the mapping funds available through agreements and the degree of precision in its location, the SRA records the available and critical data by matching them with geo-referencing. Each authorised archaeological operation is also attached to a "source" (e.g. published works or articles, prospection, diagnostics or excavation reports). Each site or archaeological deposit may thus be attached to one of several archaeological entities (AEs) which is the basic level enabling the gathering of interpretations, chronologies and locations A permanently evolving database that takes progress in research into consideration Archaeological deposits are for the mostpart buried under sediment, which means they can be detected and interpreted with a certain amount of precision only through diagnostics. Consequently the data recorded in the database are mostly short in the absence of in-depth research, which, on their own, can deliver numerous, precise, even complete data with a wide range of natures and magnitudes, whether it be data from diagnostics or excavation. The slightest traces from the past, even the most modest, revealed upon diagnostics including those that do not lead to excavation are in effect elements of archaeological heritage, the information of which must be conserved. So even a "negative" result concerning remains can have a place on the national archaeological map with all the limitations of conditions for acquiring the information. For example, the lack of remains from the Palaeolithic era in an old, diagnosed terrace is a useful bit of information for research that would guide future prescriptions in preventive archaeology as well as defining research issues. Sifting through documentation and the biblioghraphy also enrich the database. 53

56 Preventive archaeology This therefore means an inventory that claims to be exhaustive concerning available information but which remains evolutive Know, study, use: three objectives for the French archaeological map Knowing the elements of French archaeological heritage and their distribution The history of the archaeological map in France shows that such an inventory is based on a heritage process that consists in taking stock not just of the major monuments but also all the archaeological sites known by the bibliography via prospection campaigns and archaeological operations with highly variable levels of information. The tool aims at exhaustiveness in what is known by archaeologists and at a high degree of precision in terms of location, chronology and interpretation. Brainstorming that can be carried out on the distribution of known and listed sites contributes to the evolution of the scientific questionning of French archaeological research. Knowledge can then be placed in perspective with other parameters such as the presence or not of research teams in such and such an area, the kind of plant cover or the presence or not of a catchment area of activities more or less generating preventive archaeology activities. In this sense it is an aid tool in scientific scheduling which also highlights the priorities of possible research. Studying the accessible data whatever their source in order to validate them The inventory is filled out and updated according to the research results, in particular thanks to preventive archaeology operations but also by taking into account progress in the discipline itself both in dating and in interpreting facilities and sites. What is up for grabs at this phase is the archaeologists' expertise in both selecting information and in the interpreting phase by relying in particular on advice from CIRA experts as part of hindsight control. This collective scientific added value, which is the validation of data, remains very original in Europe. Using data in a perspective of scientific scheduling with attention being paid to reconciling the conservation of remains and the nation's economic development By cross-referencing the available data with other kinds of geological- or topographical-related information, the archaeological map contributes to the implementation of referral zoning of development projects, even if the available results in the database to date are only one criterion among others in choosing zoning and threshholds. Such choices have their place in a policy of archaeological research scheduling as defined by the DAPA circular of June 1st, 2004 that relies on the regional archaeological departments and the scientific control bodies, the CNRA and the CIRAs. The heritage code planned on the data of the French archaeological map being communicated in the form of extracts to proprietors, developers and the relevant state departments or the local governments. These latter, in a rationale of an impact study, can either count on a request for doing diagnostics or work on modifying their projects with a view to conserving heritage and savings in time and/or means Conditions for implementing and the state of progress 54

57 Report to Parlement Making the French archaeological map As an evolving document, the French archaeological map is regionally assessed annually as part of the CIRAs, which makes it possible to measure up the conditions for its its being carried out, i.e. gaps as well as significant progress per areas or theme. This is proving to be a long-term job and not just a one-off action tht could be finished as soon as means are made available. Methods, players and tools will compose the triptych of this first multiannual assessment. METHODS: from study fields to recording in the database The first step is through data-gathering in the field, the very first form of which is still oral investigation with local informants, in particular farmers and woodland dwellers. This way of procuring data still largely relies on amateur archaelogists which the professionalisation of the profession has slotted in this type of operation without its being abandoned by professional archaeologists, the CNRS and universities, where it is still one of the bases for training students. More generally, there are all sorts of field archaeological operations that are sources of data for the French archaeological map. With still a demand for the thoroughest possible precision, in particular geographic. The second step relies on the SRAs and the DRASSM and consists in documentary investigation where the departmental analystical capacity with expertise from the DIRAs subjects the field results to criticism and standardisation for recording in the database. The final phase, which relies on a few agents in the DRACs for harmonisation, starts with previous documentary analysis enriched by the critical validation of an expert to enter the information surrounding the adopted archaeological entity (AE) into the Patriarche computer tool, an elementary archaeological referral unit. Among this information, the assignement of geographical coordinates to the AE pin-points its location in the national soil and thus contributes to producing the map properly speaking. PLAYERS: The necessary scientific partnerships upstream Regulated by the heritage code but largely descended from practices of the regional departments, collaboration between archaeologists is the very foundation of establishing these data. The only cases of external collaborators to the archaeological world are the oral investigations mentioned above and chance discoveries, the declaration of which must be made according to article L of the heritage code. All archaeological players, in particular those local governments endowed with archaeology departments, whether authorised or not, therefore participate in working out the French archaeology map. Specific agreements enable long-term investments throughout France either around interesting themes of the research programmes or investigations carried out by local authorities. This was important aid in the past, making it possible to invest in genuine programmes dealing with littleknown areas or which, until then, were not very concerned about major developmental projects. They of course were very poorly documented. TOOL: the new computer tool for the French archaeology map, Patriarche The Patriarche software, which among other things manages the French archaeology map, was designed by the departments of the Ministry of Culture and Communications in 1998, a first version of which was delivered in May, 2002, then a definitive version in September, Patrirarche is composed of an Oracle-driven database, a requests manager (Business Objects) and a geographical information 55

58 Preventive archaeology system (SIG, Arcview 3). This software makes it possible to manage localised data and carry out the usual processing from a database and an SIG. Each regional archaeology department enters the data concerning its region into the software and also disposes of a digitalised map fund which is vital for the mapping of data on the required scale (in some cases the cadastre and systematically the IGN maps at 1/25,000 th ) as well as several other funds. The department can also vector old maps or cadastres, called Napoleonian, in order to include them in the software as a background projection when needed. At a national level, the DAPA processes data about the entire French nation with only the administrative outlines of France (country, regions, départements and municipalities) being used The state of progress This database, which is also an administrative management base, must be up to date about progress in the field and related sciences. The updating of national archaeology map information should be considered as on-going, thus making the archaeology map a ceaselessly renewed document. Consequently any extract must be dated, for it may prove to be outmoded if new discoveries are made in a short period of time. 56

59 Report to Parlement Staff dedicated to this action since 2002 FTE on the archaeology map FTE on Patriarche Region Surface area of in 2000 and the 2005 Total SRA staff in regions (in sq km) State staff AFAN staff archaeology map 2005 Alsace 8, Aquitaine 41, Auvergne 26, Bourgogne 31, Bretagne 27, Centre 39, Champagne-Ardenne 25, Corse 8, Franche-Comté 16, Guadeloupe 1, Guyane 83, Ile-de-France 12, Languedoc-Roussillon 27, Limousin 16, Lorraine 23, Martinique 1, Midi-Pyrénées 45, Nord-Pas-de-Calais 12, Basse-Normandie 17, Haute-Normandie 12, Pays de la Loire 32, Picardie 19, Poitou-Charentes 25, PACA 31, Rhône-Alpes 43, Réunion 2, Total DAPA / Sd Archetis 2 1 Table 26: The number of staff dedicated to producing the French archaeology map between 2000 and 2005, by DRAC Source: DAPA/DRAC 57

60 Preventive archaeology Constant enrichment through the input of new sites thanks to archaeological excavations and frequent updating Créations annuelles d'ea M ises à jour annuelles des EA Sources créées annuellement Créations annuelles d'ea = Yearly creations of AEs Mises à jour annuelles des EA = Yearly updates of the AEs Sources créées annuellement = Annually created sources Chart 27: Creation and updating of archaeological entities (AE) in the Patriarche software between 1986 and 2005 Source: DAPA/DRAC

61 Report to Parlement Chart 28: The number of municipalities having had an archaeology inventory (1986 to 2005) Source: DAPA/DRAC Charts 27 and 28 showing the creations and updates of archaeological entities in successive French computer software show that after an initial phase of abundant creations, priority has for several years been given to correcting and honing the data, vital for suitably informing the cases of preventive archaeology. The section of the chart corresponding to "registered sources" translates the new awareness in the Patriarche software of the references to excavation archives, reports and publications connected to archaeology research operations and to archaeological entities, previously scattered in various local databases, with no link to the archaeology map. The increase in the number of municipalities having been archaeologically inventoried is translated by a regularly climbing curve, a reflection of the progress in the archaeological knowledge of the area Communications and the communicability of information The principles established by the texts The law (the heritage code) confirms the principle of the communicability of the national archaeology map subject to the requirements related to protecting archaeological sites. The decree of June 3rd, 2004 established two categories of information for that, depending on the recipient. For an SRA, the recipients concerned are thus the scientific community of archaeologists (culture, CNRS, universities, INRAP, archaeological departments of municipalities and amateur researchers), municipalities, research departments and developers within the framework of their urban and rural planning projects as well as private individuals for their own property. The two levels of communicability introduced by the regulation make it possible to account for various uses between potential developers and individuals for private or scientific ends The limits of communicability Levels 1 and 2, as defined by the decree, remain mostly theoretical to date regarding the structure of the computer software. With the tool being designed just when the whole archaeological chain was controlled by the state, the fractionning of the various modules was not planned when the basic design was formulated. The inability to share Patriarche is due in part to the fact that the database contains personal information, the communicability of which is limited by CNIL and CADA legislation. Yet the need for exchange and the demands of interoperability between systems for heritage data have become crucial issues in particular within the framework of partnerships with operators and the archaeological departments of municipalities. They take on a particular meaning with the second phase of cultural decentralisation. 59

62 Preventive archaeology Taking this issue into account was one of the 2006 projects of the architecture and heritage information system, in particular from the angle of the "Heritage Atlas" described below Forms of communications To comply with legislative and regulatory requirements, the data from the archaeology map can at present be communicated in the form of hard-copy extracts or electronic files from the Patriarche software. In the second of the two cases, the information can be computer processed by the recorder and constitute a layer of its own geographical information system. The archaeology map is also regularly consulted in order to respond to impact studies and the processing of town-planning procedures (local maps, PLU and even SCOT) A tool for disseminating archaeological data: the Architecture and Heritage Atlas The Arcitecture and Heritage Atlas project was initiated by the department of architecture and heritage to meet the needs of a restoration of the knowledge of ethnological and ethnographical, archaeological, architectural, urban and landscape heritage. The restoration was ordered either by the regulatory obligations of publication as for the zones of architectural, urban and landscape heritage protection (ZPPAUP) or the zones of presumed archaeological prescription as set out in the heritage code or needed for serving the interests of protection, management and enhancement of heritage and scientific research, in particular in archaeology. The main objective of the Architecture and Heritage Atlas is to share the information worked out by the state's heritage departments and public establishments, the archaeological departments of local governments and archaeological operators, information that is useful in the exercise of their specific missions. This therefore means an initial period of optimising the use of existing spatial data and improving their accessibility and interoperabiliy. Thus does the Atlas contribute to informing the public, land managers and public and private developers as part of the sustainable development of the nation. This project also contributes to "modernising the state" by using geographical information as called for by the interministerial decision of January 19th, It is part of the proposal of a European Parliament directive (INSPIRE) and the Council of Europe establishing a spatial information infrastructure common to all member states. 60

63 Report to Parlement 5. The prescription and implementation of preventive archaeology operations 5.1. Procedures The heritage code and decree no of June 3rd, 2004 organise the appraisal of development projects or work affecting the underground by the regional prefectures (DRAC/SRA) so as to assess the archaeological impact and prescribe the detection measures and, should the case arise, conservation and safeguard by the scientific study that is called for. Therefore the devolved departments of the Ministry of Culture first of all determine any possible "archaeological sensitivity" of the sectors where development projects are located, then appraise the latter to determine whether it is necessary to prescribe a diagnostics operation Determining the "archaeological sensitivity" conditions the transfer of development files with a view to their being investigated by the prefect Particular archaeologically sensitive zones and sectors The geographical sectors and zones of archaeological sensitivity are the translation of known or strongly presumed contextual elements in which developments are likely to be inserted. In particular they rely on the information contained in the French archaeology map that is either used as such when it is a question of perfectly identified and delimited sites or extrapolated when it is a matter of partial elements of knowledge Total Regions Surface area Surface area Surface area Surface area Number Number Number Number (in ha) (in ha) (in ha) (in ha) Alsace , ,376 Aquitaine , , ,117 Auvergne NC 1,591,013-1,591,013 Bourgogne 98 40, ,025 Ile-de-France 33 NC 33 Limousin 1 478, ,230 Midi-Pyrénées 92 NC 92 Nord-Pas-de-Calais 3, ,500 3, ,500 Basse-Normandie 15 2, , ,722 Poitou-Charentes 57 48, ,813 Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur , ,376 Total 3, , , ,073,421 3,871 2,584,172 Table 29: New archaeological zones created by applying the law of January 17th, 2001 between 2003 and 2005 Source: DRAC Defined by the SRAs, archaeological zones were the subject of a regional prefectural decree and had the two following goals: 61

64 Preventive archaeology organising the transfer of developments projects so as to ensure their archaeological appraisal Drawing public or private developers' attention to the potential archaeological sensitivity of certain areas of France so as to enable them to better understand the constraints that might weigh on their projects. To do so, the zoning decrees issued by the prefect are transmitted to appropriate municipal mayors who ensure their publication. Region Region's surface area (in ha) zoning surface area (in ha) Alsace 8,287,860 25, Aquitaine 42,035,000 10, Auvergne 26,022,000 1,591, Bourgogne 17,598,920 40, Limousin 11,906, , Nord-Pas-de-Calais 23,552, , Basse-Normandie 45,418,770 7, Poitou-Charentes 25,809,000 48, Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur 31,400, , National 3 634,767,990 2,584, Table 30: The amount of the surface area of new archaeological zones created between 2003 and 2005 by applying the law of January 17th, 2001 in relation to the total surface area of the considered region Source: DRAC % Examing development or construction projects by the prefectural departments is thus systematic when it is a question of requests for areas located in zones defined in compliance with article L of the heritage code. The issuance however of a prescription for carrying out archaeological diagnostics is not systematic, as later archaeological appraisal might show that the projected work presents no notable impact on the conservation of known or presumed archaeological remains. According to the DRACs, the state of new archaeological zones created starting in 2003 by applying the provisions of the law of January 17th, 2001, shows a very unequal situation. Some of them in particular were shown not to create any. This situation results from the following factors: the DRACs that were already endowed with archaeologically sensitive areas prior to the enforcement of the law of January 17th, 2001 by applying previous regulatory texts either did not create new ones because there was satisfactory regional coverage or completed the tools that they already had at their disposal in a marginal way. In the former case the transmission of development projects by the appraising departments were thus operating in most cases on the basis of old archaeologically sensitive zones 3 This figure corresponds to the total surface area of the country and not to the sum of the surface areas of regions with archaeological zones. 62

65 Report to Parlement in contrast, the few DRACs that hadn't endowed themselves with archaeologically sensitive zones began more broadly to apply the provisions corresponding to the law of January 17th, 2001 Outside of the zones: the thresshold and the prerequisite request for information Archaeological zones correspond to the state of archaeological knowledge of a sector at any given time. This is knowledge that evolves according to the findings acquired by the carrying out itself of preventive archaeology operations and the updating of information contained in the French archaeology map. The purpose of this information is not to guarantee that outside of their perimeter no archaeological site can exist. Which is why legislators stipulated that outside of the zones, which, because of this, represent particular archaeologically sensitive sectors, the following are sent to the regional prefect for archaeological appraisal: all mixed-activity zone projects or projects subjected to subdivision permits if their surface area is greater or equal to three hectares development files subject to prerequisite impact studies. Major civil engineering projects such as road, rail or river routes are especially concerned by this provision More than a particular typology of projects, it is indeed an especially large projected developed surface area, leading to a greater statistical risk of archaeological site presence, that this law aims at here. But it is also to account for the possibility of changes in understanding that outside the zones, each developer can, if they so wish, question the regional prefecture to examine whether or not their project is likely to give rise to prescriptions for archaeological diagnostics. On the other hand and should the answer be negative, the law obliges the prefect to give up prescribing any archaeological diagnostics for a five-year period. Consulting the French archaeology map During the feasibility-study phase of a project of whatever kind, the potential developer can request access to some of the information contained in the national archaeology map so as to gauge its potential impact on the known archaeological heritage. The voluntary request for a diagnosis (DVRD) Lastly the law also give developers the chance to request an early archaeological diagnosis. This is the voluntary request for doing a diagnosis. Developers can thus learn about the zones containing remains and, isofar as possible, change the location of their project so as to limit the archaeological impact. 63

66 Preventive archaeology Regions Appraised projects 2002 to 2005 Total DVRD % Alsace 2, Aquitaine 5, Auvergne 3, Bourgogne 3, Bretagne 4, Centre 8, Champagne-Ardenne 3, Corse Franche-Comté 3, Ile-de-France 7, Languedoc-Roussillon 4, Limousin Lorraine 6, Midi-Pyrénées 1, Nord-Pas-de-Calais 9,200 1, Basse-Normandie 2, Haute-Normandie 3, Pays de la Loire 5, Picardie 6, Poitou-Charentes 4, Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur 4, Rhône-Alpes 7, Guadeloupe Martinique Guyane La Réunion NC NC - Total 103,036 5, Table 31: The percentage of voluntary requests for doing diagnostics of the total number of projects sent to the DRACs between 2002 and 2005 for archaeological appraisal (data on 31/08/05) Source: DRAC Appraisal by the prefect of development projects From early in 2002 through August of 2005, the DRACs received more than 100,000 projects for appraisal in the name of preventive archaeology, i.e. a rate of about 34,000 development or works cases per year, if a projection were done to the end of the year The appraisal of development projects based on referral to the prefect by the appraisal departments Almost all of the cases appraised by the DRACs come from the appraisal departments of development projects subject mainly to the national planning code and the environment code. This is how 90% of the cases arrive as opposed to 5% for cases submitted directly by the developers themselves in the name of the DVRD and 5% by other submission methods (personal referrals by the prefect in particular) Referrals Representation of submission methods 64

67 Report to Parlement Appraised Develop. Other Alsace % 4.72% Aquitaine 1,357 1,710 1,603 1, % 1.51% 0.04% Auvergne 900 1,011 1,035 1, % 1.32% 31.95% Bourgogne 940 1,085 1, % 3.94% 1.28% Bretagne 582 1,467 1, % 3.61% 0.03% Centre 1,400 2,429 3,351 3, % 4.76% Champagne-Ardenne , % 14.33% Corse % 0.44% Franche-Comté ,429 1, % 3.15% 0.14% Ile-de-France 2,098 2,395 3,062 2, % 5.31% Languedoc-Roussillon ,322 1, % 4.93% Limousin % 5.27% 4.96% Lorraine 1,394 1,384 2,149 1, % 1.32% Midi-Pyrénées % 1.83% 19.34% Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1,379 2,621 3,150 4, % 11.36% 2.30% Basse-Normandie % 12.79% 8.12% Haute-Normandie 1, ,046 1, % 2.83% 0.21% Pays de la Loire 1,095 1,574 1,834 1, % 9.62% 4.85% Picardie 2,052 2,316 2,494 2, % 9.86% 1.05% Poitou-Charentes 2,123 1,438 1,433 2, % 4.04% Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur ,470 1, % 3.18% Rhône-Alpes 2,173 2,801 2,895 2, % 2.23% 35.64% Guadeloupe NC % 1.67% 3.54% Martinique NC % 6.07% 12.15% Guyane NC % 3.22% La Réunion NC NC NC NC National 23,147 29,363 35,263 35, % 5.47% 5.16% Table 32: History of the number of developmental or works projects appraised by the DRACs' regional archaeological departments from 2002 to 2005 (Appraised = cases submitted by the appraising departments, Develop. = cases submitted by developers, Other = other submission methods) Source: DRAC Before the law of 2001 came into force, certain regions had already received developmental submissions from the appraising departments for archaeological appraisal. For the others, this submission was progressively implemented in 2003 and 2004, sometimes causing a very large increase in the number of referrals. Appraising developmental or works projects is comprised of a detailed analysis of the project's nature and its effect on the subsoil regarding objective scientific elements that determine the "archaeological sensitivity" of the zone on which the development project is located. To make the decision to prescribe a preventive archaeology operation, in particular the diagnostics, the SRA relies on all of the project's technical data (placement, depth of infrastructures, the nature and kinds of building construction and projected amenities) to assess whether the project has a real impact on the archaeological remains as they are either known or presumed. If affirmative and at this phase, a discussion with the developer can be done with a view to changing certain of the project's parameters so as to limit or avoid direct or indirect impact on archaeological remains and thus the carrying out of a preventive archaeology operation. 65

68 Preventive archaeology The issuance of a preventive archaeology prescription therefore has nothing automatic about it 4, including in archaeologically senstitive areas, since it is strictly conditioned by a project's impact regarding the conservation of potential remains. The prefect's personally submitted appraisal When the prefect has information indicating that a project that has not been submitted to him is nonetheless likely to affect elements of archaeological heritage, he or she can ask the mayor to send along the request during his/her appraisal, depending on the case, whether it be a request for demolition, authorisation to sub-divide, installation or diverse works-related authorisations or the concerted dossier for building in a development zone that corresponds to this project. For the same reason, prefects can ask the mayor to send them the declaration of works submitted in application of article L of the national planning code Prescribing preventive archaeology operations Archaeology prescriptions can contain the following: Carrying out a diagnosis with the intention of highlighting and characterising the elements of the archaeological heritage possibly present on the site Carrying out excavations with the intention of gathering archaeological data present on the site, to analyse them and ensure their understanding and registration Where appropriate, indicating changes in the project's substance, making it possible to wholly or partially avoid doing excavations or any technical development enabling the reduction of the project's effect on remains. Archaeological interventions, diagnostics or excavations are done under the control of state departments. 4 Concerning diagnostic prescription policies, see in particular point "Since January, 2003: a controlled prescriptive activity". 66

69 Report to Parlement Diagnostics The preventive archaeology diagnostics as established by law no of January 17th, 2001 concerning preventive archaeology partially includes two steps of the archaeological process which, until then, was a matter of consensus among the scientific community, i.e. "diagnostics" and part of the "assessment". Its purpose was to enable the assessment of the site's scientific and heritage quality, the need to prescribe its conservation or excavation and, in the latter case, to define the objectives and modalities for studying it scientifically. In the same intervention it therefore must respond to two goals, i.e. the detection and characterisation of archaeological remains. Detection means checking on the presence of archaeological remains through documentary studies, prospection, sampling and/or bore-holing. Characterisation tries to determine the geometry (extent and depth), the nature, the dating and conservation state and can call upon various techniques, going as far as the surface stripping of extensive areas as well as an in-depth examination of facilities or destructive bore-holing through the depth of the remains. The following are the elements contained in this characterisation: its extent its nature its dating its state of conservation its buried depth its environmental potential, i.e. the detection of elements likely to contribute to a future paleo-environmental study (bog, karst, paleo channels, etc.) The prescription of diagnostics is issued to the developer and the authority in charge of granting the authorisation; it is also addressed by the regional prefect to the INTAP and possibly to the official local authority archaeological departments. In compliance with article no. 27 of decree no , the regional prefect contracts the diagnostics to the authorised operator and informs the developer. The operator to whom the operation has been awarded establishes a draft intervention which he submits for approval to the regional prefect and, per agreement with the developer, defines the modalities and schedule for operating on the site. Upon completion of the diagnostics, the results are consigned to a full report written by the operator and sent to the regional prefecture, which then assesses it. 67

70 Preventive archaeology If the diagnostics confirm the presence of significant remains, the regional prefect can, depending on the case, prescribe total or partial conservation of the site or excavations to enable the safeguarding of remains by the scientific study. It should be noted however that in the great majority of cases the information gathered from the diagnostics constitute sufficient scientific documentation of the exposed remains, and the regional prefect then considers it useless to issue an excavation prescription. The archaeological constraint that was weighing on project's site is then lifted, and the work can begin. Total or partial conservation When the remains discovered during a diagnostics examination are of such heritage or scientific importance that they have to be conserved in situ, the prefect can prescribe total or partial conservation of the remains. With the total prescription of conservation blocking the completion of the development project, the regional prefect asks for the the site's total or partial classification as an historical monument. In such a case the relevant culture minister notifies the site's owner that the site will be classified under the conditions set out by chapter 1, title II, book VI of the heritage code. This very restrictive procedure is clearly maintained for extremely rare cases of the discovery of unusual remains, the national or European importance of which is manifest and relies on expert advice. Since the law on preventive archaeology came into force, this procedure has only been invoked one single time with the agreement of the developer: the discovery of the palaeochristian basilica in Arles. The diagnostics can also reveal the presence of remains or a particularly large density of remains on just part of the projected development's land, the excavation of which would be too costly in terms of the general development economics. The prefect can them issue prescriptions for modifying the project's substance, making it possible to avoid all or part of the excavations. These modifications can deal with the nature of the foundations, the methods of building or demolition, a change of site or any other technical adjustment making it possible to reduce the project's impact on the remains. This prescription is issued upon the request or with the consent of the developer. It is the outcome of an economic choice by him or his desire to limit his works' harming archaeological heritage. If the changes are not of such a nature as to require submitting a new request for authorisation or a request for modifying the granted authorisation, the developer addresses a technical notice to the regional prefect describing the contents of the steps taken. This procedure makes it possible to avoid excavating certain sectors of the developed land or to avoid the destruction of remains discovered, by including them in the projected constructions. Since 2003 it has been implemented some one hundred times per year with variable impact on the initial projects. Excavations 68

71 Report to Parlement When the remains revealed by the diagnostics call for a more in-depth study because of their scientific importance or their state of conservation, the prefect can issue a prescription for excavation. He must then make known his intention to issue a prescription for excavation to the relevant authority for granting the authorisation and to the developer. The prefect then has a maximum timeframe of three months to define the contents of this prescription. The prescription order for excavation must reveal the reasons for the work and be accompanied by scientific specifications, which do the following: define objectives, scientific data as well as the methodological and technical principles of the intervention and studies to be done detail the qualifications of the operation's scientific leader and, where necessary, the qualifications of the specialists needed in the interventional team define the foreseeable nature of the work required by the archaeological operation, indicate if necessary the minimum time required and supply and indicate the composition of the team determine the measures to be carried out for the preventive conservation of exposed remains set the deadline for submitting the final report The prefect consults the CIRA, a consultational commission working for the regional prefect, the interregional seat, composed of specialists from all walks of the scientific community (see 2.2). The CIRA is consulted about the opportunity of excavation prescriptions, about the goals that are set for it and on the methodology of the proposed intervention, The developer is the contracting owner of the excavations. He draws up a contract with an operator for carrying out the excavations, possibly after a tender offer. This contract, signed by both parties with proof of authorisation for the operator, is sent by the developer to the regional prefect to obtain the authorisation for excavation. The regional prefect has a one month counting from reception of the submission to grant the authorisation of excavations or reject it should the project submitted not comply with the scientific specifications. In cases of rejection, the prefect can suggest to the developer to present an amended project within a certain time limit and according to the changes he indicates. 69

72 Preventive archaeology Diagnostic prescriptions February 2002 to January 2003: the rising potential of presciptions Starting in February, 2002, regional prefectures began applying the law of January 17th, 2001 uniformly throughout France with help from the progressive implementation of circuits for transmitting development applications that began arriving in increasing numbers. The regions that had not until then carried out preventive archaeology on its lands extended their activity field by examining development or works projects that were submitted to them and by issuing diagnostic prescriptions. The others began appraising projects in still poorly known sectors archaeologically speaking. The law of 2001 clearly apportioned the roles between the state, which is in charge of prescribing archaeological interventions and the INRAP which, with the developers, organises interventions in the field and carries them out. This new separation of tasks had the effect of interrupting the on-going relationships previously maintained by the state departments with developers, allowing them to gauge the economic constraints weighing on the projects or their imperatives in project-execution time. In 2002, above and beyond the prescriptions issued under the new system, the newly created INRAP had to honour the large volume of orders for archaeological interventions submitted to the AFAN towards the end of 2001 and early 2002 by numerous developers who preferred to apply under the previous system to the 2001 law. In the autumn of 2002 it became evident that INRAP, then the only preventive archaeology operator, was unable to handle the work load, and the ministry observed an excessive extension of the time for implementing diagnostic operations leading to delays in carrying out the projected developments. Intolerable for the developers and unsatisfactory for archaeologists, the situation was made even worse by the low yield from the tax meant to fund the diagnostics (see 1.2). Towards the end of 2002 the DAPA and INRAP undertook an analysis of diagnostic prescriptions and the difficulties in implementing them, which led the minister of culture to send a circular to the regional prefectures, dated January 3rd, 2003, requesting them to show greater selectivity in the decisions about prescriptions that they would be asked to appraise. The DAPA recalled that archaeology is a science and that, as with any science, it is composed of choices, all the more so in that it is done in emergencies and must take into account the respective requirements of scientific research, heritage protection and economic and social development. In consequence of which instructions were given to the regional prefectures to exercise greater watchfulness about the scientific relevance of the measures that they might be led to prescribe. It was also a matter of ending the increase of diagnostic prescriptions for small plots of land, big consumers of operational means, the scientific results of which are not always certain. When this circular was implemented, it was accompanied in the regional departments by IGAPA in liaison with interregional commissions of archaeological research and by a re-examination of the prescriptions issued in 2002 that had not yet been carried out. 70

73 Report to Parlement Controlled prescriptive activity since January, 2003 After an initial year of implementing the new preventive archaeology system, the 2003 to 2005 period showed the installation of transmission circuits for the foregoing appraisal of development projects in the departments of the regional prefectures that translated into a sharp increase in the number of applications in 2004 (see table 33). Since January, 2003, the ratio between the number of cases examined by the DRACs and the number of issued diagnostic prescriptions, i.e. the prescription rates, has continued to dwindle. In 2005 the average prescription rate was at 8.02%, which means that about 8% of the development projects were then subject to diagnostic prescriptions. Yet this greater selectivity by the regions in issuing prescriptions goes with about a 30% increase between 2003 and 2005 in the surface areas these prescriptions dealt with. This increase derived from applying the January 3rd, 2003 appraisal and was fully compensated by the rationalisation efforts carried out by the INRAP in 2004 and 2005 in managing its operational means. The effort of controlling prescriptions has henceforth reached a threshold that it would be dangerous to lower, with a risk of exposing developers and state departments to fortuitous discoveries during the work of archaeological remains that ought to be excavated urgently to the detriment of the development work and the scientific quality of studying them. Preventive archaeology was born in France, as in Europe, not just to enable the needed scientific study of remains before they be destroyed by construction developments but above all to guarantee developers the chance to successfully terminate their projects without running the risk of work stoppages or casting their feasibility into doubt. Carrying out diagnostics prior to work is the only way to identify the archaeological constraint that hangs over land before it is cleared. The developers who handle large surface areas (mixed-use areas and subdivisions) have gauged the advantages in this anticipation of the constraint and now submit their projects to the regional departments by asking for the early execution of diagnostics. The purpose of controlling the prescriptions issued by the regional departments is no longer strictly arithmetical but now passes through a scientific process that aims to better target those areas or themes where it is suitable to proceed to operations of preventive archaeology. 71

74 Preventive archaeology Diagnostic prescriptions Prescription rate Alsace % 8.26% 8.78% 9.69% Aquitaine % 4.15% 6.24% 8.06% Auvergne % 7.72% 9.28% 10.38% Bourgogne % 6.27% 3.89% 7.34% Bretagne % 4.02% 5.03% 6.35% Centre % 6.88% 7.61% 8.62% Champagne-Ardenne % 22.51% 23.38% 11.00% Corse % 26.47% 13.16% 5.22% Franche-Comté % 7.68% 5.81% 4.21% Ile-de-France % 11.40% 10.19% 10.01% Languedoc-Roussillon % 18.07% 10.97% 15.78% Limousin % 19.79% 11.73% 6.64% Lorraine % 16.47% 11.54% 7.20% Midi-Pyrénées % 5.59% 8.38% 6.42% Nord-Pas-de-Calais % 9.84% 8.70% 5.63% Basse-Normandie % 6.57% 6.27% 6.02% Haute-Normandie % 5.20% 4.59% 5.27% Pays de la Loire % 9.72% 9.98% 8.46% Picardie % 7.21% 8.50% 10.14% Poitou-Charentes % 5.77% 7.61% 5.60% Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur % 11.68% 8.71% 11.56% Rhône-Alpes % 6.57% 5.39% 7.10% Guadeloupe NC % 2.65% 5.39% Martinique NC % 13.16% 5.75% Guyane NC % 18.85% 25.21% La Réunion NC NC NC NC National 3,444 2,586 2,973 2, % 8.81% 8.43% 8.02% Table 33: The evolution in the number of prescriptions issued by the SRAs from 2002 to 2005 and of the prescription rate (ratio between the number of prescriptions issued and the number of projects appraised) Source: DRAC A thought-process and a scientific programming process Developing preventive archaeology and asserting that this process, in the same way as "scheduled" archaeology, participates in the advancement of knowledge of ancient societies on scientific grounds encourages brainstorming as early as possible on the establishment of real scheduling that is applied to all research done as part of the discipline. Brainstorming on the scientific fundamentals of a national "policy" that should insert preventive archaeology in a more generalised process of scientific research therefore proves to be vital. The progress of knowledge in archaeology is for historic reasons in particular the uneven development of preventive archaeology very different from one region to the next. In the first place it is therefore important to have scientific schedules emerge on a regional scale through the DRACs. These have to be validated by the CIRAs before being submitted at the national level by the CNRA. 72

75 Report to Parlement With this objective in mind, the DAPA asked the General Inspector of architecture and heritage to draw up the methodological framework for work on the evaluation and scientific scheduling asked of each region (circular of June 1st, 2004) and to provide accompaniment. To be recognised and accepted by everyone, such scheduling must absolutely be validated by all partners concerned, be they the CNRS, universities, the INRAP, the departments of local governments or volunteer researchers. This collective process first aims to work out quantitative and qualitative assessments of operations and work carried out over the past few years with a view to drawing up a regional "state of research" by assembling and ordering the available elements of information by period and theme. The departments will then assemble the expert analyses of the interregional commissions on the positives and negatives of regional archaeological research so as to offer study sectors and the themes to be highlighted for a defined time to all interregional players. Without leading, for all that, to the total abandonment of research that might be located outside of the priorities thus disengaged, this scientific scheduling should contribute to founding the decisions of the archaeological departments in preventive archaeology matters Excavation prescriptions When remains of proven scientific worth are uncovered by diagnostics and no solution is planned for their conservation, the regional prefect informs the developer of his intention to prescribe. He then has three months in which to issue a decree for prescribing excavations. This time period is vital to allow the departments to determine the extent of the area to excavate, more often than not less than the diagnostic's defined area, to determine the excavation's scientific specifications and to gather the opinion of the consulting commission (CIRA). The writing of this document calls for a precise scientific analysis of the archaeological diagnostics results at the end of which the objectives that the excavation should look for as well as the investigative methods to use to get there are defined. When the remains are extensive, whether they reveal several occupations at different periods and of different natures or that they are located in places of a specfic nature, this analysis can be especially complex and require choices being made. It is suitable to assess the potential contribution of all the elements detected so as to suggest the best adapted treatment. If, for example, a diagnostics operation shows the remains of a Gallo-Roman villa built on top of a an Iron-Age farm and this on top of evidence of occupation from the late Paleolithic, the state of conservation of each of these remains should be looked into and their potential contribution to the knowledge of each period in question. The prescription of excavations subsequently issued could, for example, request a superficial analysis of the Gallo-Roman villa just to determine the layout and date, the layout and partial excavation of the structures of the Iron-Age farm to determine its date, then the thorough excavation of the late Palaeolithic occupation, considered as this site's major scientific attraction. Archaeological excavation is heavy and complicated, requiring specialised staff for a long period of time. It is therefore a costly intervention that must be implemented only as a last resort and when the scientific issues involved justify it. 73

76 Preventive archaeology Excavation presciptions Alsace Aquitaine Auvergne Bourgogne Bretagne Centre Champagne-Ardenne Corse 1 1 Franche-Comté Ile-de-France Languedoc-Roussillon Limousin Lorraine Midi-Pyrénées Nord-Pas-de-Calais Basse-Normandie Haute-Normandie Pays de la Loire Picardie Poitou-Charentes Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur Rhône-Alpes Guadeloupe NC Martinique NC NC NC NC Guyane 10 La Réunion NC NC NC NC National Table 34: The evolution of the number of excavation prescriptions issued by the SRAs from 2002 to 2005 Source: DRAC A diagnostics survey does not therefore automatically lead to an archaeological dig, even if the diagnostics reveal archaeological remains. In most cases the scientific data gathered during the diagnostics are considered sufficient to characterise the exposed remains. The information makes it possible to enrich the archaeological map and constitute complementary elements that are added to the knowledge of how the region's population evolved.thus can a diagnostics survey provide essential elements to understanding how the region evolved without its being necessary to push for more thorough studies. 74

77 Report to Parlement Appraising development projects, diagnostic prescriptions, excavation prescriptions: three steps to adapt archaeological processing to scientific needs Preventive archaeology is not limited to just archaeological excavation or more precisely, to archaeological operations in the field, which are only their most visible aspect. Assessing the steps to be taken to ensure conservation or safeguard by the scientific study of elements of archaeological heritage prior to all public or private work begins by appraising development projects Projects Prescriptions/projects Prescriptions ratio Diagnostics Digs Diagnostics Digs Digs/ Diagnostics ratio Alsace 3, % 1.86% 19.93% Aquitaine 6, % 1.65% 17.56% Auvergne 4, % 1.27% 12.68% Bourgogne 4, % 2.04% 29.66% Bretagne 4, % 1.04% 17.89% Centre 10,614 1, % 1.83% 19.06% Champagne-Ardenne 3, % 4.53% 21.59% Corse % 0.57% 6.45% Franche-Comté 3, % 0.70% 11.38% Ile-de-France 10,472 1, % 2.16% 18.43% Languedoc-Roussillon 4, % 2.60% 16.42% Limousin 1, % 4.29% 33.83% Lorraine 6, % 1.11% 9.22% Midi-Pyrénées 2, % 1.84% 21.16% Nord-Pas-de-Calais 11,640 1, % 0.90% 9.44% Basse-Normandie 2, % 1.79% 22.38% Haute-Normandie 4, % 1.59% 21.91% Pays de la Loire 5, % 1.65% 15.56% Picardie 9, % 1.29% 15.13% Poitou-Charentes 7, % 0.85% 16.71% Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur 4, % 1.63% 14.70% Rhône-Alpes 10, % 1.06% 13.14% Guadeloupe % 1.15% 25.00% Martinique % Guyane % 2.68% 14.93% National 123,366 11,857 1, % 1.57% 16.38% Table 35: A comparison of the number of cases appraised by the SRAs between 2002 and 2005, diagnostic prescriptions and excavation prescriptions issued in the same period Source: DRAC This is a first filter that enables the identification of the projects likely to do harm to elements of archaeological heritage regarding the state of our knowledge of the evolution of human land occupation. Between 2002 and 2005 this project analysis opted for archaeological diagnostics in only 9.61% of the cases on average (table 35). 75

78 Preventive archaeology Diagnostics constitute a second filter by checking on the presence of remains on the project land and by assessing the need to study them through excavation. Between 2002 and % of the diagnostics prescriptions led to excavation prescriptions, which corresponds to 1.57% of the development projects appraised by the departments. These figures however are only an indication of the impact of archaeological prescriptions on the developments since a sometimes long period of time may be observed between the archaeological appraisal of a development project and the preliminary implementation of the diagnostics, possibly followed by excavations Implementing preventive archaeology Before the law of January 17th, 2001 came into force, when projects justified it, the archaeological departments informed developers of the need to proceed with preliminary archaeological operations and engaged with them in concerted actions to study the feasability, the ways and the schedule of these operations. At present the law has replaced this concertation with the issuance of archaeological prescriptions. The prescriptions issued by the archaeological departments in the present system do not systematically lead to interventions in the field since developers have the possibility of changing their projects so they have a lesser impact on the archaeology. Moreover when the prescriptions are executed, there is considerable delay (on the order of from several months to several years) between the moment when a project gives rise to a prescription and the moment when the developer agrees with an operator about the schedule and the means for carrying out the development. In the vast majority of cases, these delays are independent of the archaeological prescription, as they are more closely linked to the state of progress in economic or various technical studies that precede the execution of the projects. Prescription often occurs when the development project is in its gestational stages and the developer does not have the full control over the land that is vital for proceeding with tests. It is therefore not surprising that the prescriptions issued, for example in 2004, have not yet led to a field operation. Moreover some of these prescriptions were issued for projects that were subsequently abandoned and will never be carried out for various reasons that have nothing to do with archaeology. When the developer informs the regional prefecture that he is abandoning his project, the latter issues a decree cancelling the prescription. 76

79 Report to Parlement Prescriptions issued Diagnostics Prescriptions Cancelled Active Prescriptions Prescriptions issued Excavations Prescriptions cancelled Active prescriptions Alsace Aquitaine Auvergne Bourgogne Bretagne Centre 1, Champagne-Ardenne Corse Franche-Comté Ile-de-France 1, , Languedoc-Roussillon Limousin Lorraine Midi-Pyrénées Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1, Basse-Normandie Haute-Normandie Pays de la Loire Picardie Poitou-Charentes Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur Rhône-Alpes Guadeloupe Martinique Guyane La Réunion NC NC NC NC NC NC National 11,857 1,397 10,460 1, ,841 Table 36: Diagnostics and excavations from 2002 to 2005: the number of prescriptions issued, the number of prescriptions cancelled, the number of active prescriptions remaining Source: DRAC Between 2002 and 2005 regional prefectures thus cancelled 1,397 prescriptions for diagnostics and 101 prescriptions for excavations (or 12% and 5.2% respectively of the issued prescriptions). The cancellation rate for excavation prescriptions is much lower than that for diagnostic prescriptions insofar as they follow on a diagnostics and therefore concern projects which are more rarely abandoned. Prescriptions/appraisal Excavation/Diag Prescriptions Appraisals ratios nostics Ratio Diagnostic Excavation Diagnostic Excavation National 123,366 10,460 1, % 1.49% 17.60% Table 37: Diagnostics and excavations from 2002 to 2005: recap of the number of active prescriptions (diagnostics and excavations) and the ratio of prescriptions and appraisals Source: DRAC Taking into account cancelled prescriptions shows that between 2002 and 2005 an archaeological diagnostics operation was prescribed in 8.48% of the cases appraised by departments. 77

80 Preventive archaeology Prescriptions for excavations were issued after 17.6% of the diagnostics, or 1.49% of the development projects appraised by the regional departments Diagnostics Doing the field interventions needed for executing a prescription for a diagnostics survey is entrusted to an operator by the regional prefect. If the developments are located in the area of a municipality or a group of municipalities that have an authorised archaeological department and has chosen to carry out all diagnostics on its territory, the diagnostics are automatically assigned to them. If none of the municipalties concerned has opted for doing all the diagnostics on its territory, each prescription executed is first offered to the authorised archaeological department of the municipality. Where applicable, priority is given to the municipal archaeological department, then to the archaeological department of the département. In cases where all of the municipal archaeological departments likely to intervene refuse to carry out the diagnostics prescription, it is assigned as a last resort to the INRAP. Local governments' authorised archaeological departments Although the number of authorised archaeological departments in local governments is constantly increasing after the law of August 1st, 2003 came into force, they are still intervening only in a marginal way to the execution of diagnostics. When a local government creates an archaeological department that is sufficiently endowed with staff and equipment to handle field interventions, several months of reflection and implementation are required. Many are still probably in gestation. Some local governments with archaeological departments already are still asking themselves about the choice of putting their departments in a position of preventive archaeology operators. This of course implies their having to find the money for increased staff. So numerous local government archaeological departments have not sought approval as preventive archaeology operators and devote their time to other tasks just as necessary such as dissemination and promotion, protection or managing archaeological desposits. Only one out of the whole country the archaeology department of the urban area of Douaisis (in northern France) has opted to carry out all the diagnostics on their territory. So in 2002 and 2003 the authorised municipal departments intervened mostly in diagnostic operations in collaboration with the INRAP. 78

81 Report to Parlement Diagnostics done Total Departments of départements Municipal departments Total Table 38: The evolution in the number of diagnostic operations carried out by authorised operators, other than the INRAP between 2002 and 2005 (2005 being an annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: DAPA Operators Since 2004, they are truly diagnostics operators and ensure about 75 diagnostics per year. An annual projection of data in the above table shows that they carried out 75 diagnostic operations in 2005 (21 for the departments of département and 54 for municipal departments). An identical projection of surface area dealt with in diagnostics corroborates this analysis. They effectively diagnosed ha in 2004 and ha in There was nonetheless an increase in the surface area dealth with by the departments of the départements (22.83 ha in 2004 and ha in 2005) and a reduction in the diagnosed surface areas by the municipal departments (32.96 ha in 2004 and ha in 2005). This should be seen as a consequence of the regulatory effort asked of the regional prefecture departments which tend to avoid issuing diagnostic prescriptions on developments of limited size. The departments of départements mostly intervene on rural developments and are seeing the surface areas confided to them expanding. Likewise, the municipal departments, mostly in charge of urban areas, where developments naturally affect smaller surface areas, no longer intervene except on small-scale developments where diagnostics are inevitable. Diagnostics done Total Depts. of départements Municipal depts Total Table 39: The evolution of the number of diagnostic operations carried out by authorised operators other than the INRAP between 2002 and 2005 (2005 is an annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: DAPA Operators In 2004 and 2005 these departments intervened at the national level on 0.78% and 0.69% respectively of the diagnosed surface area. Although the genuine use of these figures is touchy because of the lack of sufficient hindsight, it does perhaps indicate that the archaeological departments of local governments in their present configuration have reached the limits of their interventional capabilities. INRAP The French National Preventive Archaeological Institute remains the main operator in archaeological diagnostics because of the low national coverage of authorised departments of local governments the only other potential operators and their limited inerventional capabilities. 79

82 Preventive archaeology Diagnostics done Total No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % AFAN system NC INRAP system 1, , , ,658-6, Total 1, , , ,658-7, Table 40: The evolution in the number of diagnostics operations carried out by the INRAP between 2002 and 2005 according to their system (2005 is an annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: INRAP In 2002 the public body had to carry out 686 diagnostic operations that had been ordered from the AFAN. The operations inherited from the AFAN, in the above table, have now practically all been finished; henceforth they consume only small amounts of the operational means since they are essentially post-excavation jobs intended to finalise the interventional reports. Diagnosed surface areas Alsace Aquitaine Auvergne Bourgogne Bretagne ,047 Centre Champagne-Ardenne ,020 2,240 Corse Franche-Comté Ile-de-France ,160 2,652 Languedoc-Roussillon ,530 Limousin Lorraine ,244 Midi-Pyrénées ,376 Nord Pas de Calais ,390 Basse Normandie Haute Normandie ,075 Pays de Loire ,317 2,765 Picardie ,697 Poitou-Charentes ,400 Provence-Alpes-Côte-d'Azur Rhône-Alpes ,076 DOM 129 2, ,626 Total (hors DOM) 7,724 9,271 10,734 27,729 Table 41: The evolution in the surface areas (in hectares) of diagnostic operations carried out by INRAP between 2003 and 2005 (the data for 2002 are not available; those of 2005 are an annual projection carried out on 31/08/2005) 5 Source: INRAP The legislative changes in the system and its funding at the end of 2002 and during the course of 2003 upset the field intervention process by reducing, in particular, INRAP's operational capacity, for the agency could not hire the required number of fixed-contract personnel. 5 The total surface areas do not include the French overseas Dominions. The data from Guyane cannot be compared to those from other regions for the diagnostics refer to very big surface areas but look for approach methods that are radically different from those implemented in the other regions. 80

83 Report to Parlement After that an broad extention of the interventional periods of time caused legitimate complaints from developers on the delays their projects were obliged to tolerate. One of the priorities given to INRAP by the Ministry of Culture was to do all it could to mobilise interventional teams in time frames compatible with the imperatives of developmental work. Since 2004 an increase in annually diagnosed surface areas by INRAP (table 41) has been observed, a sign that the public agency's reactivity has improved. These initial results are the result of implementing more effective interventional procedures and gains in productivity. For example, in 2003 a diagnostic operation required on average 7.1 days per man per hectare; in 2005 the required no more than 6.3 days per man. Favoured by the system's legal and financial stability, this effort must continue in several directions. Optimising INRAP's implementation of means in the field should make it possible to mobilise the required teams more rapidly through better national coverage. A greater rationalisation of interventional techniques will make it possinble to increase teams' interventional capacities without however compromising the scientific quality of the results obtained Excavations When excavation is prescribed following a diagnostic operation, it is sent to the developer along with scientific specifications. These documents make it possible to define an excavation market and, where applicable, compile a file of tender offers. The developer is owner of the archaeological excavation and sets the schedule, the time periods and the ways of execution with the operator he has selected. The latter must obtain authorisation from the regional prefect before starting his intervention. Dealing with naturally different sites on which it is desireable to apply methods that are adapted to the scientific goals, excavations demonstrate a large disparity that still prevents reliable statistical analysis. The surface areas concerned vary a lot and have no direct relationship with the means to be implemented. The excavation of a stratified, 1,500 sq. m site with a depth of archaeological deposit sometimes going several metres deep requires more time and personnel that a non-stratified excavation site measuring 2 to 3 hectares. INRAP Also in excavation matters the INRAP is the main operator because of its long experience, the scientific skills of its personnel and its broad national coverage. Henceforth open to other operators, this sector obeys the general market rules made between the owner/developer and his service provider after negotiations on time frames and costs. Implementing this functioning mode still experiences problems essentially related to the developers' learning curve, the role played by the preventive archaeology project supervisor, tellingly different from the role they had been used to until then. 81

84 Preventive archaeology Excavations done Total No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % AFAN system NC INRAP system Total Table 42: The evolution in the number of preventive excavations carried out by INRAP between 2002 and 2005 depending on what system they belong to (2005 is an annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: INRAP The annual variation in the number of excavations carried out by INRAP, shown in the above table, does not truly reflect the variation of its abilities to intervene. The variability in surface areas concerned and the complexity of the operations may in themselves suffice to explain such a strong annual variation. The time taken by these field operations, sometimes heavy and complicated, that often extend beyond a year, create distorsions in the distribution of calendar years. It would be advisable to seek a more appropriate statistical analysis mode when the number of excavations will have become sufficiently representative. Other authorised operators Local government archaeological departments in 2002 and 2003 intervened in excavations conducted by INRAP as part of collaboration agreements. The law of August 1st, 2003 allowed them to become autonomous operators, and, starting in 2004, their field activity in this sector increased. They carried out nearly twice as many operations than the previous year on surface areas nearly twice as large. Excavations done Total Depts. of départements Municipal depts Private or associations Total Table 43: The ebvolution in the number of excavations carried out by authorised operators other than INRAP between 2002 and 2005 (annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: DAPA Operators Here again there is not enough statistical hindsight to be able to gauge whether the role played by the local government departments in doing excavations is going to continue to grow. The role's development is closely related to the policies of the local governments in archaeological matters. Most of those who have created and outfitted their archaeological departments are not part of a purely economic reationale, rather in a voluntary rationale for studying and enhancing their archaeological heritage. Excavations done Total 82

85 Report to Parlement Depts. of départements Municipal depts Private or associations Total Table 44: The evolution in the surface areas (in hectares) of the excavations carried out by authorised operators other than INRAP between 2002 and 2005 (annual projection done on 31/08/2005) Source: DAPA Operators All presently authorised private operators are small, and none has large interventional means (personnel, equipment, etc.). They are all either concentrated in a restricted geographical area or on precise scientific themes. They are therefore not yet able to ensure several digs simultaneously or largescale excavations. 83

86

87 Report to Parlement Annexes Annex 1: Annex 2: Annex 3: List of current legislation and regulations concerning preventive archaeology Collecting the preventive archaeology tax (the department of public accounting, Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Industry) French archaeology map: A few examples of the archaeological inventory in the appraisal of urban planning projects A graph attached to a local urban plan (PLU): Angerville (Essonne) A map worked out as part of general information and zoning for appraising urban development projects: Rennes (Ile-et-Vilaine) Response to a SCOT (French National Harmonisation Survey) study: the southern region of the Gard département 85

88

89 Report to Parlement Annex 1: Current legislation and regulations concerning preventive archaeology Legislative Code du patrimoine, livre V, Titre II (Heritage Code, Book V, Title II) Regulations Decree no of June 3rd, 2004 relating to the administrative and financial procedures in preventive archaeology matters Decree no of April 2 nd, 2002 dealing with the provisions applicable to the agents of the National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (appended by decree of August 28th, 2002 art. 1) Decree no of January 16th, 2002 concerning the status of the National Institute of Preventive Archaeology Research (appended by decree no of June 3rd, 2004 art. 89) Order concerning the definition of the documentation to be submitted for compiling the case for an FNAP subsidy request (underway) Order of August 1st, 2005 concerning the establishment of the share of the yield from the preventive archaeology tax allocated to the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology Order of April 14th, 2005 on setting the portion of the yield from the preventive archaeology tax allocated to the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology Order of March 1st, 2005, on naming the commission for the National Fund for Preventive Archaeology Order of January 31st, 2005 on defining the contents of the request for accepting excavation costs and the documents to furnish for compiling an application (applying the Decree of June 3rd, 2004 art. 101) Order of September 27th, 2004, on defining the contents and presentation standards of archaeological operation reports (applying the decree of June 3rd, 2004 art. 58) Order of September 16th, 2004, on defining the standards for identifying, inventorying, classifying and and conditioning the scientific and furniture and fixtures documentation issuing from archaeological diagnostics and excavations (applying the decree of June 3rd, 2004 art. 60) Order of August 25th, 2004 on defining the good conservation conditions of archaeological furniture and fixture remains (applying the decree of June 3rd, 2004 art. 62) Order of July 8th, 2004 on defining the qualifications required of departmental staff and public- or private-law persons as candidates for authorisation as preventive archaeology operators (applying the decree of Juney 3rd, 2004 article 75) 87

90 Preventive archaeology Circulars Circular no UHC/DU3 of June 23rd, 2005 relating to the preventive archaeology tax (culture/equipment) Circular no. 2004/025 of November 24th, 2004, relating to the concertation between the developers department and the regional archaeological departments and relating to the collection of the tax for building linear transportation infrastructure Circular no. 2003/019 of November 5th, 2003, relating to the preventive archaeology tax (partially appended by circular no UHC/DU3 of June 23rd, 2005) Circular no. 2002/013 of May 3rd, 2002, relating to preventive archaeology (presently being updated) 88

91 Annex 2: Collecting the preventive archaeology tax GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTING Paris, 4TH SUB-DIRECTORATE OFFICE 4B 10 RUE AUGUSTE BLANQUI MONTREUIL The Director General of public accounting Contact: J-L Guillier Tel: +33 (0) Fax: +33 (0) TO Madame Director of general administration Monsieur Director of architecture and heritage Ministry of Culture and Communications Re: Collecting the preventive archaeology tax The yield from the preventive archaeology tax (RAP) is issued concurrently by the Regional Directorates of Cultural Affairs (DRAC) and the département Directorates of Infrastructure (DDE). Issuing jurisdiction to local governments has been implemented to date only very marginally. 1) A profile of issuing tax invoices When the law was presented in 2003 for expected income of from 75 to 80 million euros (from 15,000 to 18,000 invoices), it was planned to divide it up between the departments of the Ministry of Culture and Communications which would issue 80% of the income, representing 20% of the number of invoices, the remainder's being incumbent on the Ministry of Infrastructure.

92 The temporary cumulative figures from November, 2005 break down in the following manner: Figures in millions of euros Tax levied Percentages 2004 TOTAL % 2004 incl. Infrastructure % incl. Culture % TOTAL % 2005 incl. Infrastructure % incl. Culture % CUMUL % incl. Infrastructure % incl. Culture % The 80 million euros originally planned were reached in October of The distribution and pace of the issuances experienced varying developments depending on the original certifying officer (see the following chart). Redevance d'archéologie Préventive - Fin novembre 2005 Emissions des titres de recette G Montants en euros janv-04 févr-04 mars-04 avr-04 mai-04 juin-04 juil-04 août-04 sept-04 oct-04 nov-04 déc-04 janv-05 févr-05 mars-05 avr-05 mai-05 juin-05 juil-05 août-05 sept-05 oct-05 Prov. Nov2005 Prises en charges Titres DDE Prises en charges Titres MCC Redevance d'archéologie Préventive Fin novembre 2005 = preventive archaeology tax end November, 2005 Émissions des titres de recette = Issuing tax invoices Montants en euros = Amounts in euros Prises en charges Titres DDE = Imposition of DDE invoices Prises en charges Titres MCC = Imposition of MCC invoices - the pace of issuing invoices by the departments of the Ministry of Infrastructure early in 2004 was disturbed by the application of impositional rules, which were the subject of numerous complaints. The tax regime was appended by article 17 of law number of August 9th, 2004 relating to support for consumption and investment. With the ability to submit a claim for tax relief remaining open until December 31st, 2004, the exemptions were levied on income upon collection, especially in the 1st half of 2005

93 - The pace of issued invoices by the departments of the Ministry of Culture saw a regular increase with a slight rise beginning in the 2 nd quarter of ) Collection The tax invoices issued by the certifying officers are taken by the general treasuries, then addressed to a specialised treasury in the département, to which the collection jurisdiction has been assigned. The following is the collection information at the end of November, 2005: Figures in millions of euros Income TOTAL incl. Infrastructure 10.2 incl. Culture 5.4 TOTAL incl. Infrastructure 15.1 incl. Culture 15.6 CUMUL incl. Infrastructure 25.3 incl. Culture 21.0 The collection observed in 2005 concerns the invoices issued in 2004 and 2005 At the end of 2004 a computer software dedicated to this end was installed in the treasuries, and training for its use was begun in the 1st half of 2005 (about 200 people). In an interministerial framework moreover the staff of the DRACs received specific training from the MINEFI (DGCP) on the legal aspects of collecting the preventive archaeology tax. Redevance d'archéologie Préventive - Fin novembre 2005 Encaissements par les comptables publics Montants en euros janv-04 févr-04 mars-04 avr-04 mai-04 juin-04 juil-04 août-04 sept-04 oct-04 nov-04 déc-04 janv-05 févr-05 mars-05 avr-05 mai-05 juin-05 juil-05 août-05 sept-05 oct-05 Prov. Nov2005 Encaissement Titres.DDE Encaissements Titres.DRAC Encaissements par les comptables publics = Tax receipt by public accountants Encaissement Titres. DDE = DDE receipts Encaissement Titres. DRAC = DRAC receipts

94 The pace of income had different success rates depending on the invoices (see following chart). Spontaneous collection was noticeably disturbed in September 2004 by complaints relating to the tax base according to the rules instituted in With the lack of visibility about the outlook of exemptions resulting from the law of August, 2004, accountants found it impossible to (manually) start mass litigation collection, a source of controversy in its own right. Exemptions were issued in a meaningful way by the authorising officers in the 1st half of The funds collected were distributed on a monthly basis between INRAP and the FNAP. The monthly pace of tax collection thus rose from 2.1m euros in September to 4.2m euros in October and 5.5m euros in November. The collection rate evolved as shown in the following chart: Redevance d'archéologie Préventive - Finnovembre 2005 Taux de Recouvrement 80,00% 70,00% Taux de recouvrement 60,00% 50,00% 40,00% 30,00% 20,00% 10,00% 0,00% janv-04 févr-04 mars-04 avr-04 mai-04 juin-04 juil-04 août-04 sept-04 oct-04 nov-04 déc-04 janv-05 févr-05 mars-05 avr-05 mai-05 juin-05 juil-05 août-05 sept-05 oct-05 Prov. Nov2005 Taux de Recouvrement Titres DDE Taux de Recouvrement des Titres DRAC Redevance d'archéologie Préventive Fin novembre 2005 = preventive archaeology tax End of November, 2005 Taux de Recouvrement = Tax Rate Taux de recouvrement Titres DDE = Rate of DDE Collection Taux de Recouvrement des Titres DRAC = Rate of DRAC Collection From January to November, 2005, the collection rate of the tax by the Ministry of Infrastructure rose from 26.12% to 46.88%, and the rate for the tax for the Ministry of Culture from 44.44% to 73%. During the same period the collection rate in all categories rose from 30.35% to 54.95%. To improve the collection rate, directives were sent to treasurers to ask them on the one hand to look at it from a managerial point of view with he tax officers and, on the other, to recommence litigious collection (the circular letter of October 3rd, 2005).

95 3) Management problems The RAP's tax collection, for operations backed by building permits, experienced problems (as in urban-development tax matters) connected to the "uncoupling" of when the tax is levied and the date of the beginning or the end of the work, i.e. the RAP is taxable in advance for building work (several months or several years). On the other hand all the collection management have experienced particular problems: - lack of budget entry authorising expenditure concerning public developers (local governments) - the identification of tax payers when it is a matter of private developers (e.g. a real estate investment trust): on this point a draft amendment, aiming to extend the right of communications existing in tax matters, was proposed in the autumn of 2005 but was not adopted - INRAP and FNAP debts regarding beneficiairies of exemptions: given the cashflow problems, INRAP had to return a sum of 1.425m euros to the public treasury (the situation as of 31/10/2005). Those tax payers who had settled their initial debt and who received an exemption found themselves waiting for reimbursement: the fact that the public treasury proceeded to reimburse before INRAP and the FNAP de facto opened up treasury advances to these agencies that did not conform to the Loi organique relative aux lois de finances (LOLF, an important legal reform of France's budgetary management in 2001). * * * The collection system on the one hand and the exemptions-restitution system on the other of the preventive archaeology tax puts the treasury accounts at the heart of a complex system containing three categories of tax officers and four categories of beneficiairies. In this framework the tax payer's position as sole player adopted by the public treasury does not make it possible to honour in a satisfactory manner the requests for restitutions consequent to exemptions for which the funds were transferred to the final destinees.

96

97 Rapport au Parlement Annex 3: [French] National Archaeological Map Document graphique annexé au plan local d'urbanisme figurant les zones inscrites en N au titre de l'archéologie = Map attached to the local urbandevelopment plan showing the archaeological zones marked with a number 95

98 Preventive archaeology Carte archéologique de Rennes = Archaeological map of Rennes Illustration du porté à connaissance PAC : = Illustration of supplementary information : 96

99 Rapport au Parlement opérations archéologiques (diagnostics, fouilles programmées, fouilles préventives, sauvetages urgents), structures archéologiques, mention de découvertes fortuites et dossiers d'urbanisme instruits. = archaeological operations (diagnostics, scheduled excavations, preventive excavations, emergency rescue), archaeological structures, notice of unforeseen discoveries and appraised urban-planning projects) Mentions de découvertes fortuites = Notes of unforeseen discoveries Structures archéologiques = Archaeological structures Diagnostic = Diagnostics Fouille préventive = Preventive excavation Fouille programmée = Scheduled excavation Sauvetage urgent = emergency rescue Dossiers d'urbanisme instruits = Appraised urban-development projects zonage archéologique = archaeological zoning 97

100 Preventive archaeology SCOT SUD DU GARD : Patrimoine Archéologique et Territoires = SCOT, SOUTH GARD: Archaeological and Territorial Heritage Service Régional de Archéologie janvier 2004 = Regional archaeological Department January,

101 Rapport au Parlement Garrigues = Garrigue (brushland) Vaunage = Vaunage Plaine du Vistre = Plaine du Vistre (Vistre Plain) Costières = Ridge Rhône = Rhone Etang et palus = Ponds and Marshes Abbaye = Abbey Edifice défensif = Fortified building Temple antique = Ancient temple Eglise = Church Carrière = Quarry Aqueduc de Nîmes = Nîmes Aqueduct Pôle ancien = Ancient centre of activity Pont = Bridge Voie domitienne = Domitienne Way Source : Service Régional de l'archéologie = Source: Regional Archaeological Department Illustration cartographique de la prescription patrimoniale pour le SCOT sud du Gard = A map showing the heritage prescription for the SCOT (National Harmonisation Survey), southern Gard 99

102 Preventive archaeology Annexe 4 : French regions 100

103

104 Direction de l administration générale Direction de l architecture et du patrimoine 182, rue Saint-Honoré Paris cedex