Keywords

6.1 Introduction

With each low tide, England’s largest open air archaeological site opens to the public. Ranging from rugged cliffs to sprawling sand dunes, mudflats and estuaries, England’s 4,400+ km of coastline is as topographically varied as the archaeological remains found along it. The intertidal zone, the area of land exposed between low and high tides, reveals a significant, well preserved and arguably overlooked archaeological and natural heritage resource (Bailey et al., 2020). It provides a unique insight into responses to climatic and environmental change throughout human history on the British Isles. Many of these remains are, by terrestrial archaeology standards, remarkably accessible to anyone visiting the coast. Indeed, for those living in coastal communities, the curious timber structures, wrecks, submerged forests, prehistoric human footprints and myriad other finds and features exposed on the beaches have provided a lifetime's interest, posing ongoing questions of the what, why, who and how of their origins. In addition, visitors to these coasts can also gain a snapshot of the long maritime heritage of this country. It is an unrivalled cultural and natural heritage repository.

For those living in coastal communities, intertidal archaeology is a visible proxy of our changing coastline. The impacts of wave, wind and tide combined with the effects of human interaction with the landscape are written on the fragile archaeological remains they expose and the spaces they once occupied. They highlight the immediate impact of the growing number and intensity of storms that batter the coastline, an observed factor of human-driven changes in global climate (IPCC, 2022). Many intertidal archaeological remains and natural features (such as submerged prehistoric forests) cannot withstand such erosive forces indefinitely and almost all, once exposed, are at risk of destruction. Studying and protecting this valuable resource by more traditional archaeological means (or indeed by any other on the ground survey methodology) is a challenging task at best, both logistically and financially. Tidal windows rarely permit more than a few hours recording and the conditions on many sites prohibit the use of methods and machinery that would, on land, make the task relatively straightforward. Alternative approaches are therefore required that address the challenges of conducting archaeological survey in coastal environments, namely the scale of the archaeological resource in question, its fragility, accessibility, the movement of the tides, recording techniques, preservation and so on. We stress again that these are not solely archaeological considerations but problems faced by anybody seeking to survey the intertidal zone in a useful level of detail.

This chapter examines the work of the Coastal and Intertidal Zone Archaeological Network (CITiZAN) and its participatory approach to preserving by record England’s valuable coastal heritage. It begins with a brief account of coastal archaeology in the UK, setting CITiZAN in context with those projects that preceded (and guided) it. The planning and design of both phases of the project are then addressed, establishing the methodology that would define the project and its legacy. There follows a case study of the Mersea Island Discovery Programme and the impact of the project on the community and, most importantly, vice versa, before concluding with some personal reflections of one authors’ experience of the project. An additional case study is briefly presented in the box text, and this relates to another CITiZAN sub-project, the South Devon Rivers Project which was developed by NF. We stress again (and both authors have been involved in varying degrees in the work of CITiZAN) that although the central focus is on an essentially cultural (archaeological) coastal project, the lessons we have learned since 2015 have implications for project management of similar participatory community endeavours on the foreshore.

6.2 The CITiZAN Project in Context

CITiZAN was launched in 2015 with the principle aim of preserving by record England’s fragile, at-risk coastal heritage. It was formed in response to the growing threats to the coast posed by a changing climate, particularly more powerful and frequent storm events that could damage or destroy exposed archaeological remains. Major storms in 2013/14 provided a clear impetus to develop a new, national response to the issue given the severe damage and flooding they wrought to large swathes of the coastline (BBC, 2014; Masselink et al., 2016). Through regular monitoring of these exposed sites, the project aimed to develop the most detailed, publicly accessible map and photographic record of England’s coastal heritage to date, the results of which could inform future research in the archaeological discipline and beyond.

The scale of England’s coastal archaeological resource had already been documented by two earlier projects. The National Mapping Project (NMP; Cattermole & Hoggett, 2020) in the early 1990s focussed on identifying archaeological sites from maps and aerial imagery, giving priority to those areas that were poorly understood or at greater risk of destruction. The NMP laid the foundations for the follow-up Rapid Coastal Zone Assessment Surveys (RCZAs), commissioned in the early 2000’s by, at that time, English Heritage (Archaeology Data Service nd). These surveys would examine in greater detail the sites and features noted in the NMP by ground truthing them where possible. Crucially, it also sought to characterise the nature of a variety of risks to each site (natural coastal erosion, deposition of sediments, coastal redevelopment, etc.). The RCZAs were delivered by several different organisations, often on a regional basis, with the last stretches of coast in the southwest completed in 2020. They further detailed the sheer scale and often well-preserved nature of intertidal archaeological remains, but in doing so would raise questions about how this resource should and could be protected for further research, an all but impossible task for any single county archaeological service or national organisation to undertake.

From a technical perspective, the methodology used to record intertidal sites in England would be showcased by Wilkinson and Murphy during the Hullbridge Basin Survey (Wilkinson & Murphy, 1995). Focussed initially on the river of the same name, the study aptly demonstrated the value of archaeological research within an environmental framework in relation to coastal change. It developed techniques required to maximise the value of data it was possible to capture within limited tidal windows. The results married well-preserved archaeological and environmental evidence with climatic data to provide one of the most detailed chronologies of coastal and sea level change in England. Based on the success of the initial phase, the study was quickly expanded to include all major estuaries in Essex and set the benchmark for the techniques and potential of intertidal archaeological survey in England (Murphy, 2014), a benchmark upon which the CITiZAN project was founded.

Data from the NMP, RCZAS, Historic Environment Records (HERs) and several other national, regional and local datasets was consolidated during the development phase of CITiZAN to create a database containing over 17,000 archaeological sites and features—an impossible number for any single organisation to record and monitor effectively. A broader approach was, therefore, required, one that could respond effectively to high rates of change around the coast. One solution lay in developing a network of professional archaeologists and academics, bringing their expertise and support to volunteers around the country via a central project team. As with any successful citizen science project, an easily replicable, simple and scalable methodology was required that would allow anyone to participate irrespective of prior experience. CITiZAN was, therefore, always conceived as a citizen science project with grand ambition on a grander scale. Key project partners reflected this ambition and included Historic England, The Crown Estate, National Trust, Council for British Archaeology and Nautical Archaeology Society, each with established national networks of specialists and volunteers to support the project. Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) led the project which was headquartered at their offices in London.

6.3 A Citizen Science Model for Managing Coastal Heritage

CITiZAN’s participatory framework was built upon the successful models of two preceding coastal community archaeology projects, Scotland’s Coastal Heritage at Risk Project, started in 2012 and ongoing and based at the University of St Andrews (SCHARP, n.d.) and the Thames Discovery Programme, started in 2010 and ongoing and based at Museum of London Archaeology, London (TDP, n.d.). Both projects developed successful participatory models for volunteer led recording and monitoring programmes on the coast. Facing a similar issue of scale, SCHARP developed an app that allowed anyone with a suitable phone to rapidly and simply survey intertidal archaeological features. Designed to provide a few key pieces of data to the project team, volunteers were able to upload photographs, a GPS-derived location and description of the feature in question. The data was used to build a map of coastal archaeology in Scotland, with volunteers able to monitor these sites by providing photographic updates throughout the year, highlighting those sites that were most at risk or were actively eroding. SCHARP’s app proved that, given the right tools, volunteers could contribute meaningful, quality data remotely using technology familiar to them, and to interact with the team remotely for advice and feedback. The app was designed to supplement fieldwork projects around the Scottish coast, providing an opportunity for those that couldn’t attend in person to contribute to the project.

The TDP also operate a successful framework for in person survey sessions on the Thames foreshore. Typically, volunteers attend two-day training events to develop a basic understanding of Thames archaeology and history, and the key recording techniques used on the foreshore. A session of foreshore recording follows before volunteers are formally recognised as member of the Foreshore Recording and Observation Group (a FROG), ready to survey and monitor the foreshore autonomously, sending their results to the TDP team. The two-day events are just as much as an opportunity to meet people with a similar interest and to form, or become part of established, FROG groups already operating on the Thames and providing a social network for volunteers, with many forming new friendships on the back of the experience. The TDP also offers a range of events for the public beyond registering as a formal volunteer. Guided walks, lectures, open foreshore days, and partnerships with other Thames-centric organisations ensured a range of means for people to participate in the project, particularly if archaeology wasn’t their primary interest.

6.4 The CITiZAN Structure

CITiZAN was designed to combine and build upon the successful approaches of both SCHARP and the TDP, and was delivered in two phases, the first between 2015 and 2018 and the second between 2019 and 2022. Phase one focussed on establishing the projects’ identity, aims and app-based methodology on a national scale. Key goals were to promote use of the CITiZAN app, train volunteer teams in coastal communities to autonomously record and monitor the archaeological heritage of England’s foreshore; raising public awareness of the issues addressed by the project and developing a network of professionals and academics to support the long-term sustainability of the initiative. Six community archaeologists (CAs) were divided geographically in the southwest, north and southeast, with a project manager and project lead in London, made up the core team.

A bespoke app was commissioned as the primary means for the public to participate in the project. A modified version of that developed by SCHARP, the data captured by the CITiZAN app was amended to support the database structure of the Historic Environment Records (HERs), in theory allowing a seamless transmission of data from the project to the archive. The app required users to register with the project in order to submit data which was moderated by the project team before being put live on a publicly accessible interactive map of England (CITiZAN, 2022). A feedback loop to the contributor was designed to support their development as foreshore surveyors and provide a line of communication with the project team. In principle, the app was a simple, effective means of public participation. In practice, that wasn’t always the case, a point addressed towards the end of this chapter.

The CA’s remit was to create teams of volunteers capable of autonomously monitoring the coastline. A programme of events, including but not limited to, talks, seminars and guided walks, was developed to support a series of volunteer training events that mirrored the TDP approach. Opportunities to attend were promoted via local social media channels, through partnerships with local groups, and with national bodies with an established local volunteer base. Taking place at weekends, day one focussed on skills development and included basic archaeological concepts, photography, basic finds identification and rapid foreshore survey techniques. Day two was typically dedicated to foreshore survey at a key site nearby, putting skills into practice and building volunteer confidence identifying and recording archaeological features. Each region aimed to deliver the same programme to ensure consistency in learning outcomes for volunteers, a key requirement of the funding body.

A second phase was grant funded by the NHLF to follow in 2019–2022. Funding was awarded based on the high engagement figures achieved during phase one and a well-received TV programme, Britain at Low Tide, that showcased CITiZAN and the issues surrounding coastal heritage. The second phase allowed for a revision of the methodology, primarily to scale down foreshore survey to six geographically discreet Discovery Programmes: Liverpool Bay, South Devon Rivers, East Kent Coast, Humber estuary, Solent Harbours and Mersea Island. Additional archaeologists were hired to support this new structure, and, amongst other things, new funding ensured important revisions to the app could be made. A driving factor behind these changes was to focus efforts and resources to bring more depth to foreshore survey and study. A revised training programme was established with greater variability for each Discovery Programme to best fit the communities and archaeology they were focussed on. A detailed appraisal of the second phase accompanies site reports and evaluations of the project, accessible via an interactive map linked to the CITiZAN website (https://citizan.org.uk) (Fig. 6.1).

Fig. 6.1
An outline map of England highlights the 2 study areas. They are marked in the southwestern coastal strip at some distance from each other.

Location of the two study areas mentioned in the chapter: South Devon Rivers Discovery Project (L), Mersea Island, Essex (R) (Niall Finneran)

Full size image

6.5 The Mersea Island Discovery programme—A Case Study

Each Discovery Programme was managed by a single Project Officer (PO) with part-time support from a community archaeologist, therefore each was unique in terms of its structure and delivery. Each DP had its own successes and challenges, defined by the geography and archaeology of the area in which they were operated. The author managed the Mersea Island Discovery Programme between 2018 and 2021 and is therefore why it features as a case study, but it is only one of five other examples of how the project delivered a participatory model for recording and protecting coastal heritage against a background of climatic change. Details of all DPs can, for comparison, be found via CITiZAN’s website.

Mersea Island sits just off the Essex coast at the mouth of the Blackwater estuary. Home to c.6,000 people, Mersea is a true island community. At the highest tides each month, it is separated from the mainland when the Pyefleet channel breaches the Strood causeway, the only point of access to the island. It is famed for its oysters, an industry around which the community has thrived for centuries and that many lifelong residents and families have been a part of. Along its southern shores, at the lowest of tides, sprawling mudflats stretch over two kilometres from the modern shoreline, exposing a beguiling landscape rich with archaeological evidence of the islands’ prehistoric, Roman, Saxon, Medieval and more recent past. It is here that over 200 archaeological features have been recorded by members of the public and a dedicated team of CITiZAN volunteers since 2016 (Northall, 2019).

It is important to note that CITiZAN’s presence on Mersea Island is a direct result of an already bubbling undercurrent of archaeological intrigue. It was a Mersea resident who first contacted the project team via the website. They were looking for help identifying features on the local foreshore that he had grown up observing and had been monitoring for decades. Learning of the CITiZAN project through a Google search, a meeting was arranged at which the form and tone for the project would be set. CITiZAN’s study on Mersea Island was almost exclusively led by the residents of the island, centred on a core group of well-connected individuals within the community. Such was the scale of the exposed archaeological landscape that, without this intimate local knowledge and guidance, much of import would have gone unobserved. Areas of the mudflats were suggested and scouted, fish and oysterman were probed about their recent observations on the estuary, the local museum catalogues and finds consulted, aerial surveys conducted and much more, all by a committed group of volunteer residents. This framework would prove vital to the popularity of the project, making it truly a co-developed initiative. Members of the community anecdotally felt more able to participate because friends and trusted members of the community were already invested and were recognised on the island as being linked to the project. This self-seeded network was also an important conduit through which other members of the community could pass on information easily and more socially. With so many people having such direct and frequent access to the foreshore for a variety of reasons, a conversational approach to sharing sightings and finds proved invaluable.

A more formal structure of free talks, visiting lecturers, exhibitions, guided walks and finds identification events ran alongside frequent foreshore walks, surveys and chats at the local cafés. Larger in scale, they served to share the work of the volunteer team and to inspire people to participate in the project. These events were relatively successful with many in attendance as a result of word of mouth and general conversation about the project on the island. Between 2016 and 2022 over 700 people attended a total of 21 CITiZAN events on Mersea Island, with several evening talks ‘selling out’ and audiences of over 80 people gathering in school halls and community centres, eager to learn more of their island past. A further 72 people attended training sessions (capped at eight–ten people to ensure safety on the foreshore) and foreshore survey work over the two phases of the project. Between them they have surveyed five key sites of some significance, including a Bronze Age timber trackway, the conserved timbers now form part of a permanent display in the Mersea Island Museum. Funding for the display raised was locally to the tune of £6,000 (Hutchinson, 2022a). Another site surveyed was a mid-Saxon, likely fishing complex, with a high level of structural preservation (Hutchinson & Newman, 2022) and an as yet, unidentified but large mid-Saxon timber feature stretching over 160 m from beach to low water (Hutchinson, 2022b). Surveying these sites brought the volunteers into contact with a range of experts from MOLA, Historic England and Colchester Council, and it was these opportunities that they treasured the most:

A Mersea volunteer: ‘These projects are not about individuals; they are about whole communities. The future lies with and relies upon the generations to follow within those communities. Local people with local knowledge, not people who are here today and gone tomorrow with merely a passing interest, not one day trippers who come to snatch a brief moment to add to the list of places they have visited. The value of such projects lies in capturing the very hearts and minds of those people who have made their homes in those places and for whom moving away would be a last resort, many families have lived in, or return for holidays to these locations for generations, whose pride in that continued association is embedded in their everyday lives’.

The organically developed structure of the project gave it a truly social aspect, the value of which cannot be emphasised enough by the author. Where participants were given the freedom to lead their own investigation, with friends and people they trusted, the confidence of those participants to engage with the aims of the project, its findings and its future was remarkable. Of course, this is not the first archaeology project to embed itself in a community, but it is one of a small number in a coastal setting. The coast is, by and large, an attractive place to spend some time. As several volunteers noted, particularly those who had travelled from further afield to Mersea their interest in the project was as much for access to the coast and to meet with people as it was for the archaeology. The delightful setting of this community study also surely played a significant role in its popularity. The CITiZAN project as a whole and the Mersea Island DP were able to capitalise on an already considerable knowledge base that exists in coastal communities around the English coast. Its relatively continual presence successfully galvanised the community, supporting them to play an active and valuable role in protecting their coastal heritage.

The South Devon Rivers Discovery Project

Another sub-project within the 2015–21 CITiZAN management programme was the South Devon Rivers Discovery Project which was initially devised by one of the present authors (NF). Work focussed on recording the foreshore heritage of the Rivers Exe, Teign and Dart in South Devon. Each river has its own distinctive environmental and cultural character: the Dart is very much a focus of leisure and tourism, picturesque and with a large and devoted yachting and boating community (and in terms of socio-economic profile, relatively wealthy). The Teign is very much an industrial river, with a historic focus on granite, clay and metals exploitation. The Exe, the longest of the rivers and with the widest estuary, in contrast, is lesser exploited. Small settlements are located along the river estuary, and there is a significant National Nature Reserve at Dawlish Warren. During the COVID-19 pandemic, it was impossible to arrange face-to-face training sessions (these had proved to be very popular, taking in foreshore recording on the Exe and work at the coastal site of Berry Head in Torbay on the Torbay coastal Geopark). Project archaeologist Grant Bettinson used this time to develop self-guided walks along the estuaries (low-tide trails) and historic mapping (Storymaps) using crowd-sourced content. In addition regular blogs and webinars from guest speakers keep the project very much in the public eye during a time when any form of social interaction was impossible. This is one of the main legacies of the CITiZAN work here (see https://citizan.org.uk/discovery-programmes/south-devon-rivers/).

6.6 What Could CITiZAN Have Done Better?

Participatory projects operating on a national scale are no easy feat to deliver. Borrowing from the successes of other, similar project models, whilst helpful in the planning stages, was not always a guaranteed route to success. In planning CITiZAN it was difficult to estimate the level of public interest in the project, and perhaps a conservative estimate during that phase resulted in too few project staff to accommodate and develop this enthusiasm sustainably. In order to try and sustain the support of some local groups for example, the project arguably tried to accommodate too many ideas that weren’t directly relevant to its core aims. Rather, on occasion it tried to satisfy a range of views of what the project should be doing rather than what it set out to achieve, resulting in a drawn-out case of mission creep. By aligning itself with the challenge of a rapidly eroding coastline it ran the risk of being viewed as a traditional archaeological rescue project but without the financial and archival means to be so, a situation that on occasion put it at odds with partner organisations and concerned members of the public who were frustrated at the project’s inability to act quickly to rescue certain features.

In terms of the participatory model, a sustained focus on the CITiZAN app across both phases of the project was unfortunately difficult to maintain. As the central means of public participation, the app was not supported as diligently as it could have been. The app could (still) be conceived of as a standalone project that would have benefitted from constant refinement, creating what could be a useful tool for professional archaeologists and the public beyond the life of the project. The powerfully simple ideas behind the app were lost behind an occasionally difficult and drawn-out user experience made heavy by over technical language and detail that many found too clunky and specialist. It suffered from dated design throughout the second phase (by that time it was five years old) and ultimately became a side line to the more detailed foreshore surveys, perhaps alienating those users around the coast who had supplied a stream of data over the first three years. As the public facing element of the project there needed to be much more attention paid to functionality and feedback. Without a budget for consistent refinement and development this opportunity was lost, along with the chance to offer a means of continued participation for those unable to attend public events.

Participatory projects such as CITiZAN can provide unique opportunities to work with an enormously passionate, knowledgeable and experienced community. The varied interests and careers of the dedicated volunteers and members of the public who took part in the Mersea Island Discovery Programme were central to making it a success. They provided fresh perspectives on the archaeological evidence they so routinely observed, perspectives that were born of an intimate knowledge of the landscape in which many had lived most of their lives. Beyond the issues the project faced, both self-inflicted and encountered, public enthusiasm for coastal archaeology was always evident. The CITiZAN model works best when practitioners have the time and freedom within a project to embed themselves in the communities with which they’re working. In an environment as active and changeable as Mersea, a regular presence is vital to capture and act upon the observations of the community, retaining their interest and commitment to the project.

Tailored versions of the model have obvious applications in coastal communities around the world (Milne et al., 2023), and for a variety of subjects beyond archaeology such as foreshore habitat loss and change and coastal erosion, to name but two. A small pilot project funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) titled Changing Minds Changing Coasts, established a methodology for the study of coastal change on Mersea Island over the last century. Delivered by CITiZAN’s Mersea team during the COVID-19 pandemic, the project remotely gathered old postcards, photographs, maps and oral histories. The resulting database was used to create a GIS exploring how the islands coast had been impacted by factors including estuarine pollution and changes in marine flora and fauna (accessed via https://citizan.org.uk/low-tide-trails/mersea-island-changing-minds-changing-coasts/). The project found that the combination of un-seen materials it was able to obtain from residents coupled with oral histories allowed for a considerable degree of accuracy in plotting changes over the century, including a level of detail that is otherwise difficult to attain through more traditional scientific models (Hutchinson et al., 2021). The project provided an alternative way to develop the CITiZAN model to gather valuable data that would otherwise likely never been encountered by those studying the subject matter. It offered residents a unique way to engage with the project using their own resource and memories and has since been developed into a new Heritage Lottery Funded Project, again being led by MOLA.

The challenge of protecting our coastal heritage is certainly one that can be met by the public where accessible tools and participatory frameworks can sit alongside adaptability to local needs and interests. So varied is the archaeological evidence around our coastline that the interests of a wider proportion of the general public can be focussed on the protection of their coastal heritage. The scale of the CITiZAN project, its achievements, number of people involved in its six discovery programmes are testament to this potential (see Morel et al., 2023).

6.7 Conclusion

The foregoing discussion has focussed upon a participatory community heritage/archaeological project. It offers a good example of interplay between academics, specialists and the public. One of the present authors (OH) has a background within archaeological fieldwork and survey, giving a strong and credible practical underpinning to the delivery of the training. The other author (NF) has worked in an advisory academic capacity on the South Devon Rivers Discovery Project (see box; one of CITiZAN’s sub-projects). This has involved helping develop training materials and underpinning research materials. Both authors have in their different ways engaged with the public during training and outreach events and as noted above although there have been obvious logistical difficulties, it is clear that well-thought-out participatory initiatives such as this have the potential to seize the imagination of the non-specialist (some of whom may in fact have better local knowledge than the so-called experts). It is this balance that makes this participatory approach so refreshing.

In the UK our coastal heritage assets, cultural and natural, are at risk from climate change. A CITiZAN group working in Poole Harbour in conjunction with the National Trust undertook photogrammetric recording of an eighteenth-century brick limekiln on Brownsea Island (see https://www.citizan.org.uk/interactive-coastal-map/78380/). Using free-source commercially available imaging software, it was possible to build a three-dimensional virtual model of the kiln and its surroundings. This is preservation via recording; the National Trust coastal management strategy is now clear: don’t work against nature (National Trust nd). Manage the natural process of erosion due to rising sea levels and more frequent storm events and accept that coastal heritage assets are going to disappear. To professionally record these assets would be a hugely time consuming and expensive exercise. This is where community-focussed action comes into its own. Furthermore, one of the present authors (NF) who works on maritime cultures in the Caribbean is also exploring ways to adapt the CITiZAN model for use in insular Caribbean coastal settings. CITiZAN has now completed its two tranches of funded work yet its legacy remains and will remain an important model going forward. The third iteration of the project will focus more explicitly on the collection of oral histories around England’s changing coastline, maintaining the strong personal and participatory ethos which can, as we have shown, underpin similar conservation and management projects, not just in the UK and not just on coastal archaeology.