Human Resources in Canada's Built Heritage Sector: Mapping the ...

HUMAN RESOURCES IN CANADA’S BUILT HERITAGE SECTORProfessional Development:Professional development needs differ considerably across the professions involved in the built heritage sectorand also by the stage of an individual’s career in the sector. For individuals in the policy and programmeadministration field, professional development chiefly takes the form of attending conferences and, in somecases, participating in specialized training in UNESCO-related bodies. In light of the limited number ofpersons that are involved in heritage policy, it is not surprising that there are few opportunities in Canada forprofessional development training. The requirements of professionals involved in site management, heritagearchitecture and conservation include a specific focus on technical issues and, in particular, being kept abreastof developments in conservation technologies. All professionals benefit from exposure to developments inconservation strategy and conservation philosophy.Our interviews and workshops indicated that there may be a significant unmet demand for professionaldevelopment training. It was particularly notable that technical courses offered by Parks Canada are “sellouts.” It was not clear from the interviews and workshops whether the professional development deficitreflects the limited availability of such training in Canada or whether the resources that public and non-profitemployers are able to invest in professional development are simply too limited. Limited budgets forprofessional development is undoubtedly a factor, but they may not be the whole explanation. Relative tomany other fields, the institutional capacity to provide professional development training in Canada isfragmented and under-developed.Professional Occupational Standards:In the discussion of heritage systems in other jurisdictions, an important contrast emerged between theUnited States and the United Kingdom. In the US, the Department of the Interior, through the NationalParks Service, has established occupational guidelines which are mandatory for bodies accessing federal fundsor federal tax credits. The guidelines apply to the employers or engagers of professionals and must thereforebe reflected in tender specifications or job descriptions. This system operates outside of any system ofprofessional accreditation and, in many respects, operates in lieu of such a system. In the UK, by contrast,the “national trusts” encouraged various professional associations to adopt accreditation systems that couldsubsequently be linked to funding conditions. In the UK the movement towards accreditation extends totechnical occupations and skilled trades, through the NVQ system. Engineers, however, have not been a focusof concern in the UK. In the US, the occupational guidelines are limited to professional occupations andinclude engineers.Before considering whether Canada should consider either of these approaches, we must ask what theproblems are and how they manifest themselves. The interviews and workshops identified three possibleproblems: architects, engineers and project managers. Many architects and engineers, it should be noted, alsoundertake project management functions. The central issue raised was broadly the same: in the absence ofspecific training or experience in the built heritage sector, architects, engineers and project managers can makeserious errors that ultimately cause irretrievable damage to a heritage structure. The essential problem is afailure to recognize the built heritage sector as significantly different from new construction and ordinaryrenovation or repair.46©CULTURAL HUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL