ABSTRACT
One of the most well-known effects of the introduction of the Malta-convention is the obligation for developers to fund excavation of archaeological sites that they will disturb. The cost of excavating makes it appealing to fi nd ways to preserve archaeological remains in situ while still developing and building on sites. Moreover, preservation in situ is the preferred option in the Malta convention. Increasingly, developers search for ways to build on archaeological sites while at the same time preserving the remains underneath (e.g. Davis et al., 2004). Some adverse effects on these archaeological sites are inevitable. It is up to archaeologists to decide to what extent such effects may be acceptable when evaluating construction plans that include in situ preservation. Deciding what effects are acceptable, and when excavations
(preservation ex situ) are necessary is diffi cult. This is not just because of the uncertainties of the archaeological remains present in an unexcavated site. A bigger problem is the lack of knowledge on the impacts of construction on archaeological sites.
