Cultural heritage specialist with over 30 years of experience advising industry, governments, and Indigenous communities throughout North and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Andrew’s expertise includes the identification, assessment, and mitigation of project effects on both tangible and intangible cultural heritage, due diligence, risk assessment, and heritage safeguard policies. Past roles with Golder Associates include Principal/Cultural Heritage Specialist, Environment Division Manager and the Global Environmental Planning, Sustainability and Climate Practice Area Leader, comprised of Aquatics, Cultural Heritage, ESIA, M&A, Sustainability & Climate Change and Terrestrial Biology. Andrew leads WSP’s Archaeology & Cultural Heritage Practice Area Network and is a Sessional Instructor and Honorary Research Associate at the University of British Columbia.
Twenty-one years ago we completed our last of four field seasons excavating inter-tidal and sub-t... more Twenty-one years ago we completed our last of four field seasons excavating inter-tidal and sub-tidal sediments in Montague Harbour, Galiano Island, British Columbia. While a permit report describing basic results and several analytical publications ensued, a final summary concluding publication remained to be completed. Here we present the essential elements of this forthcoming publication, which will discuss methodology, provide a comprehensive database on recovered artifacts and ecofacts, present sedimentological and facies analyses, radio-carbon dates, and a set of conclusions and propositions arising from our findings. We will conclude our presentation with some thoughts on the future of practical prehistoric underwater archaeological fieldwork on the northwest coast within the context of contemporary research.
ABSTRACTFinancial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effe... more ABSTRACTFinancial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cultural heritage because it creates unwelcome risk and can affect their reputation. For bank clients, adverse project effects on cultural heritage can result in reputation risk, impede access to finance and insurance, increase operational costs, and jeopardize on-time and on-budget delivery of projects. To address this risk, financial institutions implement environmental and social policy frameworks that include specific requirements for the consideration of cultural heritage. This article examines the place of cultural heritage in the lending practices of 25 of the world's largest private-sector banks and its relevance for heritage practitioners who may be retained to provide advice, review or undertake fieldwork, and prepare studies in keeping with the private-sector bank policies and external standards described. The article concludes with a recommended best practice for pr...
In 2006, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC)... more In 2006, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), introduced eight Environmental and Social Performance Standards (PSs) to define IFC clients' responsibilities for managing their environmental and social risks, including those related to cultural heritage. Since their introduction, the PSs have evolved into a de facto global standard that other development banks and many private sector banks, insurers, and development proponents have voluntarily adopted to help manage their own risk exposure. Although the widespread adoption of such policies can be viewed positively as a reflection of good governance, the PSs were never designed with this purpose in mind. This article traces the development of cultural heritage policy within the World Bank Group, then critically examines the IFC PSs as they relate to cultural heritage, drawing attention to the elements in need of revision to better reflect internationally recognized good practice for the management of cultural heritage. Equally important, we recommend the development and implementation of a bespoke cultural heritage framework for the private sector.
The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, 2020
We review the history of underwater archaeological investigations of submerged prehistoric remain... more We review the history of underwater archaeological investigations of submerged prehistoric remains on the North Pacific Coast of North America, divided into three phases: Phase 1 (1960s–1981) – hypotheses and “wet-site archaeology”; Phase 2 (1981–1994) – operationalized scuba explorations of submerged anchor stone accumulations and the Montague Harbour Underwater Archaeology Project; and Phase 3 (1995–present) – refined modeling of regional sea beds for areas of high archaeological potential on submerged relict shorelines with limited testing and identification of late Pleistocene and early Holocene archaeological deposits on near-shore intertidal and interior upland strandlines. The latter part of Phase 3 also saw the potential for submerged prehistoric cultural resources integrated into consideration of development project assessments. Finally, the Coastal Migration Route for early migration to the Americas shifted from a peripheral proposition to a central complimentary paradigm. These multiple streams of theory, modeling, and pragmatic effort are poised to converge in a new era of practical underwater archaeological research on the North Pacific Coast.
Financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cu... more Financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cultural heritage because it creates unwelcome risk and can affect their reputation. For bank clients, adverse project effects on cultural heritage can result in reputation risk, impede access to finance and insurance, increase operational costs, and jeopardize on-time and on-budget delivery of projects. To address this risk, financial institutions implement environmental and social policy frameworks that include specific requirements for the consideration of cultural heritage. This article examines the place of cultural heritage in the lending practices of 25 of the world's largest private-sector banks and its relevance for heritage practitioners who may be retained to provide advice, review or undertake fieldwork, and prepare studies in keeping with the private-sector bank policies and external standards described. The article concludes with a recommended best practice for private-sector financial institutions, a call to action for heritage practitioners to advocate for robust safeguards, and a call for support of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals by both heritage practitioners and private-sector financial institutions. Normalmente, las instituciones financieras suelen evitar proyectos que tendrán un efecto adverso significativo en el patrimonio cultural, ya que crea un riesgo no deseado y puede afectar su reputación. Para los clientes bancarios, los efectos adversos de los proyectos en el patrimonio cultural pueden dar lugar a un riesgo de reputación, impedir el acceso a la financiación y a los seguros, aumentar los costos operativos y poner en peligro la entrega a tiempo y el presupuesto asignado de los proyectos. Para hacer frente a este riesgo, las instituciones financieras implementan marcos de política ambiental y social que incluyen requisitos específicos para la consideración del patrimonio cultural. En este artículo se examina el lugar del patrimonio cultural en las prácticas crediticias de 25 de los bancos del sector privado más grandes del mundo y su relevancia para los profesionales en aspectos de patrimonio cultural quienes pueden ser contratados para pro-porcionar asesoramiento, revisar o realizar trabajos de campo y preparar estudios de acuerdo con las políticas del sector privado y normas externas descritas. El artículo concluye con una mejor práctica recomendada para las instituciones financieras del sector privado, incluyendo un llamado para que los profesionales en la gestión de patrimonio cultural aboguen por salvaguardias sólidas y apoyen los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible de las Naciones Unidas tanto por parte de profesionales como por instituciones financieras del sector privado. Palabras clave: instituciones financieras, bancos, salvaguardias, riesgo, objetivos de desarrollo sostenible, patrimonio cultural, Principios de Ecuador, ISO 26000, evaluación ambiental, debida diligencia This article concerns business practices adopted by private-sector financial institutions for the purpose of safeguarding cultural heritage. Although considerable attention has been paid by the banking industry to the protection of UNESCO World Heritage Sites (WHSs) 1 inscribed under natural criteria (see WWF 2015, 2016, 2017), initiatives for cultural-heritage preservation have received less attention. Whereas some authors have looked at the heritage-management policies of multilateral development banks such as the World Bank (see Fleming and Campbell 2010; Lilley 2013; Mason 2012), investment law and arbitration for cultural heritage (Vadi 2014), and corporate social responsibility for cultural heritage (Starr 2013), the literature is largely silent on the role of private-sector financial institutions and their approach to the management and protection of cultural heritage. This is significant as these banks represent the bulk of global investment, and their potential impact on cultural heritage is far greater than that of development banks. Financial institutions adopt governance structures that protect business interests, promote sustainable practices, and manage their risk exposure. Consistent with this approach, financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have significant adverse
Twenty-one years ago we completed our last of four field seasons excavating inter-tidal and sub-t... more Twenty-one years ago we completed our last of four field seasons excavating inter-tidal and sub-tidal sediments in Montague Harbour, Galiano Island, British Columbia. While a permit report describing basic results and several analytical publications ensued, a final summary concluding publication remained to be completed. Here we present the essential elements of this forthcoming publication, which will discuss methodology, provide a comprehensive database on recovered artifacts and ecofacts, present sedimentological and facies analyses, radio-carbon dates, and a set of conclusions and propositions arising from our findings. We will conclude our presentation with some thoughts on the future of practical prehistoric underwater archaeological fieldwork on the northwest coast within the context of contemporary research.
ABSTRACTFinancial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effe... more ABSTRACTFinancial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cultural heritage because it creates unwelcome risk and can affect their reputation. For bank clients, adverse project effects on cultural heritage can result in reputation risk, impede access to finance and insurance, increase operational costs, and jeopardize on-time and on-budget delivery of projects. To address this risk, financial institutions implement environmental and social policy frameworks that include specific requirements for the consideration of cultural heritage. This article examines the place of cultural heritage in the lending practices of 25 of the world's largest private-sector banks and its relevance for heritage practitioners who may be retained to provide advice, review or undertake fieldwork, and prepare studies in keeping with the private-sector bank policies and external standards described. The article concludes with a recommended best practice for pr...
In 2006, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC)... more In 2006, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), introduced eight Environmental and Social Performance Standards (PSs) to define IFC clients' responsibilities for managing their environmental and social risks, including those related to cultural heritage. Since their introduction, the PSs have evolved into a de facto global standard that other development banks and many private sector banks, insurers, and development proponents have voluntarily adopted to help manage their own risk exposure. Although the widespread adoption of such policies can be viewed positively as a reflection of good governance, the PSs were never designed with this purpose in mind. This article traces the development of cultural heritage policy within the World Bank Group, then critically examines the IFC PSs as they relate to cultural heritage, drawing attention to the elements in need of revision to better reflect internationally recognized good practice for the management of cultural heritage. Equally important, we recommend the development and implementation of a bespoke cultural heritage framework for the private sector.
The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, 2020
We review the history of underwater archaeological investigations of submerged prehistoric remain... more We review the history of underwater archaeological investigations of submerged prehistoric remains on the North Pacific Coast of North America, divided into three phases: Phase 1 (1960s–1981) – hypotheses and “wet-site archaeology”; Phase 2 (1981–1994) – operationalized scuba explorations of submerged anchor stone accumulations and the Montague Harbour Underwater Archaeology Project; and Phase 3 (1995–present) – refined modeling of regional sea beds for areas of high archaeological potential on submerged relict shorelines with limited testing and identification of late Pleistocene and early Holocene archaeological deposits on near-shore intertidal and interior upland strandlines. The latter part of Phase 3 also saw the potential for submerged prehistoric cultural resources integrated into consideration of development project assessments. Finally, the Coastal Migration Route for early migration to the Americas shifted from a peripheral proposition to a central complimentary paradigm. These multiple streams of theory, modeling, and pragmatic effort are poised to converge in a new era of practical underwater archaeological research on the North Pacific Coast.
Financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cu... more Financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have a significant adverse effect on cultural heritage because it creates unwelcome risk and can affect their reputation. For bank clients, adverse project effects on cultural heritage can result in reputation risk, impede access to finance and insurance, increase operational costs, and jeopardize on-time and on-budget delivery of projects. To address this risk, financial institutions implement environmental and social policy frameworks that include specific requirements for the consideration of cultural heritage. This article examines the place of cultural heritage in the lending practices of 25 of the world's largest private-sector banks and its relevance for heritage practitioners who may be retained to provide advice, review or undertake fieldwork, and prepare studies in keeping with the private-sector bank policies and external standards described. The article concludes with a recommended best practice for private-sector financial institutions, a call to action for heritage practitioners to advocate for robust safeguards, and a call for support of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals by both heritage practitioners and private-sector financial institutions. Normalmente, las instituciones financieras suelen evitar proyectos que tendrán un efecto adverso significativo en el patrimonio cultural, ya que crea un riesgo no deseado y puede afectar su reputación. Para los clientes bancarios, los efectos adversos de los proyectos en el patrimonio cultural pueden dar lugar a un riesgo de reputación, impedir el acceso a la financiación y a los seguros, aumentar los costos operativos y poner en peligro la entrega a tiempo y el presupuesto asignado de los proyectos. Para hacer frente a este riesgo, las instituciones financieras implementan marcos de política ambiental y social que incluyen requisitos específicos para la consideración del patrimonio cultural. En este artículo se examina el lugar del patrimonio cultural en las prácticas crediticias de 25 de los bancos del sector privado más grandes del mundo y su relevancia para los profesionales en aspectos de patrimonio cultural quienes pueden ser contratados para pro-porcionar asesoramiento, revisar o realizar trabajos de campo y preparar estudios de acuerdo con las políticas del sector privado y normas externas descritas. El artículo concluye con una mejor práctica recomendada para las instituciones financieras del sector privado, incluyendo un llamado para que los profesionales en la gestión de patrimonio cultural aboguen por salvaguardias sólidas y apoyen los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible de las Naciones Unidas tanto por parte de profesionales como por instituciones financieras del sector privado. Palabras clave: instituciones financieras, bancos, salvaguardias, riesgo, objetivos de desarrollo sostenible, patrimonio cultural, Principios de Ecuador, ISO 26000, evaluación ambiental, debida diligencia This article concerns business practices adopted by private-sector financial institutions for the purpose of safeguarding cultural heritage. Although considerable attention has been paid by the banking industry to the protection of UNESCO World Heritage Sites (WHSs) 1 inscribed under natural criteria (see WWF 2015, 2016, 2017), initiatives for cultural-heritage preservation have received less attention. Whereas some authors have looked at the heritage-management policies of multilateral development banks such as the World Bank (see Fleming and Campbell 2010; Lilley 2013; Mason 2012), investment law and arbitration for cultural heritage (Vadi 2014), and corporate social responsibility for cultural heritage (Starr 2013), the literature is largely silent on the role of private-sector financial institutions and their approach to the management and protection of cultural heritage. This is significant as these banks represent the bulk of global investment, and their potential impact on cultural heritage is far greater than that of development banks. Financial institutions adopt governance structures that protect business interests, promote sustainable practices, and manage their risk exposure. Consistent with this approach, financial institutions typically avoid projects that will have significant adverse
Uploads
Papers by Andrew R Mason