Distribution limited WHC-93/CONF.002/14
4 February 1994
Original: English/French
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL
ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Seventeenth session
(Cartagena, Colombia, 6-11 December 1993)
REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Opening session and election of the new Bureau 1
Reports:
The Secretariat 3
The Rapporteur of the Committee 6
Management of the World Heritage Centre 8
Monitoring
Methodological aspects 12
State of conservation reports
- Natural properties 15
- Cultural properties 21
Nominations
- Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List 36
- Property inscribed on the List of World Heritage
in Danger 44
Tentative lists 44
The World Heritage Fund and budget 45
Requests for International assistance 47
Operational Guidelines (revision) 51
Promotional activities 53
Cultural landscapes 55
Date and place of the eighteenth session and other
questions 56
Closing session 58
ANNEXES
I. List of Participants
II. Agenda
III. Address by Mr A. Badran, Deputy Director-General
a.i. of UNESCO
IV. Report on the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention since the sixteenth session
of the World Heritage Committee
V. World Heritage Committee Declaration on Bosnia
VI. Report of the Expert Meeting on "Approaches to
the Monitoring of World Heritage Properties:
"Exploring ways and means", Cambridge, U.K. (1 to
4 November 1993)
VII. Report of the International Expert Meeting on
"Cultural Landscapes of Outstanding Universal
Value", Templin, Germany (12 to 17 October 1993)
VIII.Action Plan for the Future (Cultural Landscapes)
I. INTRODUCTION
I.1 The seventeenth ordinary session of the World
Heritage Committee was held in Cartagena, Colombia, from 6
to 11 December 1993. It was attended by the following
members of the Committee: Brazil, China (People's Republic
of), Colombia, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,
Lebanon, Mexico, Niger, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Senegal,
Spain, Thailand, and the United States of America.
I.2 The following States Parties to the Convention
who are not members of the Committee were represented by
observers: Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Cuba, Czech
Republic, El Salvador, Guinea, Holy See, Hungary, Nepal,
New Zealand, Paraguay, Slovak Republic, Sweden,
Switzerland, Tunisia and Venezuela.
I.3 Representatives of the International Centre for
the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of the
Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on
Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation
Union (IUCN) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity.
The complete list of participants is given in the Annex I.
II. OPENING SESSION
II.1 The outgoing Chairman of the Committee, Mr.
Robert Milne, opened the session by thanking the
authorities of Colombia, namely the Minister of Education
of Colombia, Ms Maruja Pachon de Villamizar and Mr Juan
Luis Mejia, Director-General of COLCULTURA, for inviting
the Committee to convene its seventeenth session in
Cartagena, Colombia. He then invited Ms M. Pachon de
Villamizar to address the Committee and read the message of
the President of Colombia, Mr Cesar Gaviria Trujillo.
II.2 The Minister of Education of Colombia, Ms Maruja
Pachon de Villamizar welcomed the delegates and
participants and thanked the Committee for accepting the
invitation of the Government of Colombia to hold its
meeting in Cartagena. She read the message of President
Cesar Gaviria Trujillo in which he underlines UNESCO's
major role in awakening in all countries of the world the
interest for the past and its preservation, for all that is
unique and irreplaceable. Thanks to UNESCO's efforts
linked particularly to the World Heritage Convention,
memory, identity, heritage and environment have acquired
broader significance that is being passed on to future
generations.
II.3 The Representative of the Director-General of
UNESCO, Mr Adnan Badran, Deputy Director-General a.i.
thanked the Government of Colombia for its generous offer
to host this session, congratulated the representatives of
the newly elected members of the Committee, namely the
*[2]
Delegates of Brazil, France, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Niger
and the United States of America, and thanked the outgoing
Chairman, Mr Robert Milne, for his endeavours to promote
the World Heritage Convention. He then briefly presented
the main results regarding World Heritage of the twenty-
seventh session of the General Conference of UNESCO, held
in Paris from 17 October to 16 November 1993.
II.4 Referring to Resolution 3.1 adopted by the
General Conference, Mr Badran informed the Committee that
the Director-General of UNESCO has been invited (i) to
promote the World Heritage Convention in the Member States
of the Organization and the general public; to ensure
systematic and continuous monitoring of the World Heritage
sites; to identify action to ensure their conservation; and
to mobilize the resources required for that purpose; (ii)
to enhance preventive action in the Member States for the
protection of cultural property and to facilitate prompt
intervention in case of natural or human-made disasters;
and (iii) to mobilize international support for
safeguarding operations and to strengthen on-site training
of conservation specialists. The General Conference
underlined also the need to set up within UNESCO a
specialized data bank and document service based on the
information provided by systematic monitoring of the World
Heritage sites and the need to develop innovative
multimedia communication and education projects to increase
public awareness and support.
II.5 The Director-General of COLCULTURA, Mr Juan Luis
Mejia, first underlined the importance of the World
Heritage Committee's mission, saying that its task was to
protect humankind from its own improverishment through the
destruction of its oldest natural and cultural wealth. In
his quest for progress, man has confronted nature and has
transformed it to his own image. His relation to nature
has been one of destruction rather than cohabitation. Now,
however, in the spirit of the World Heritage Convention, we
are trying to remedy this situation, and are searching for
a more harmonious relation between humankind and its
environment.
II.6 Recalling that Colombia adhered to the World
Heritage Convention in 1983, Mr Mejia noted that Colombia
has established a series of mechanisms to preserve its
cultural and natural heritage. This policy is reflected in
the 1991 Constitution, particularly in a number of articles
which Mr Mejia elaborated further in his statement.
III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
III.1 The Delegate of the United States of America
proposed that a new item be added on the revised
provisional agenda, immediately after the Report of the
Rapporteur, which would be 'Management and staffing of the
World Heritage Centre'. Following this motion, seconded by
*[3]
Delegates of Germany and Thailand, the Committee adopted
the revised agenda as amended.
IV. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON, RAPPORTEUR AND VICE-
CHAIRPERSONS
IV.1 Ms Olga Pizano (Colombia) was elected Chairperson
of the Committee by acclamation. Mr D. José Guirao Cabrera
(Spain) was elected Rapporteur, also by acclamation, and
the following members of the Committee were elected as
Vice-Chairpersons: China, Oman, Senegal, Thailand and the
United States of America.
V. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY THE SECRETARIAT
SINCE THE SIXTEENTH SESSION
V.1 Mr Bernd von Droste, Director of the World
Heritage Centre and Secretary of the Committee,
congratulated the Chairperson, the Rapporteur and the Vice-
Chairpersons on their election and thanked the outgoing
Chairperson and Bureau members for their excellent work.
He then reported on the activities undertaken since the
sixteenth session of the Committee.
V.2 Having pointed out that there are presently 136
States Parties to the Convention, he first reminded the
Committee of the appeal launched by the General Assembly at
its ninth session on 29 and 30 October 1993 for the
preservation of World Heritage sites endangered by war and
civil conflict, urging all States Parties to reinforce
public awareness through education and the mass media.
Currently, there are 378 properties on the World Heritage
List, of which 276 are inscribed as cultural sites, 87 as
natural and 15 as mixed sites. These are situated in 86
States Parties. As more than 70 monitoring reports carried
out in the past twelve months show, most of these sites
face serious problems of conservation.
V.3 Having referred to the Santa Fe session of the
World Heritage Committee as a milestone in its work, as it
marked the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the
World Heritage Convention, Mr von Droste then reported on
the main accomplishments of the past twelve months,
outlining them on the basis of the five strategic goals of
the Strategic Orientations adopted by the Committee in
Santa Fe.
V.4 Speaking of Goals 1 and 2 (completion of the
identification of the World Heritage and ensuring the
representativity of the World Heritage List), he informed
the Committee that ICOMOS organized in July 1993 in
Colombo, Sri Lanka, an expert meeting to prepare a
methodological framework for a global study on the World
Heritage List and thematic studies of the different types
*[4]
of cultural properties which could be proposed for
inscription, including those that are poorly represented
or, in some cases, not represented at all. ICOMOS also
carried out two parallel thematic studies, one on the
industrial heritage and the other on twentieth-century
architecture. It should be pointed out, however, that in
spite of these efforts, there is as yet no concensus in the
scientific community on this matter.
V.5 As regards the tentative lists, as basic
instruments to evaluate the "outstanding universal value"
of each property nominated on the List, Mr von Droste
informed the Committee of the results of an analysis made
by the World Heritage Centre, which shows that of the 136
States Parties to the Convention, only 60 (44%) have
presented tentative lists. Of these, only 31 (23%) provide
the information as requested by the Operational Guidelines.
As for the representativity of the World Heritage List
(Goal 2), he informed the Committee of the conclusions of
the expert meeting on the question of cultural landscapes
which took place in Templin (Germany) in Autumn 1993. The
meeting concluded that the revised cultural criteria for
including cultural landscapes on the World Heritage List
are applicable.
V.6 Referring to Goal 3 (to promote adequate
protection and management of the World Heritage sites), Mr
von Droste mentioned Angkor and Mount Nimba as examples of
the operational safeguarding work done by UNESCO in the
past year. He also reported on the findings of the mission
sent to the Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia); the
remedial efforts to improve the waterflow in the Srebarna
Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) and the IUCN mission to Sangay
(Ecuador), the results of which would be presented at this
session. He furthermore reported on the regional training
courses, supported under the World Heritage Fund, held in
Tanzania, Cameroon, Costa Rica and Mali, a training
workshop held in China and other training courses held in
Saudi Arabia and Mali. Assistance for training in cultural
heritage conservation was given for a ten-month
interregional course for historic preservation held in
Brazil, and for courses organized by ICCROM, such as the
stone conservation course in Venice and other courses on
mural paintings, architectural conservation and scientific
principles of conservation.
V.7 Mr von Droste informed the Committee that US$
129,500 had been spent as emergency assistance for four
cultural sites (Angkor, Dubrovnik, the Historic Centre of
La Havana and Shibam) and two natural sites (Mount Nimba
and Virunga National Park). Furthermore, the UNESCO
General Conference, at its 27th session held in November
1993, underlined the need to create a flexible structure
for emergency action which would allow rapid and effective
safeguarding assistance in the event of natural or man-made
disasters. Speaking of this, he pointed out the need to
*[5]
create closer links between monitoring programmes and
international assistance programmes, as this would
considerably improve the World Heritage Centre's
performance.
V.8 The Committee was also informed of the technical
seminar on tourism in natural and mixed World Heritage
properties, organized by the World Heritage Centre, jointly
with UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) and in
cooperation with the WTO (World Tourism Organization), held
in Dakar, Senegal, from 22 to 27 November 1993. This was
attended by managers of fourteen World Heritage sites from
thirteen States Parties. The seminar dealt with six main
issues: tourism and physical facilities, marketing and
relationship with the tourism industry; visitor management;
education and interpretation; planning; carrying capacity
and monitoring. The participants agreed on the principles
of tourist management and recommended that these be further
examined by site managers on a regional basis.
V.9 As requested by the Committee, the World Heritage
Centre convened an expert meeting on the concept and
framework for systematic monitoring of natural, cultural
and mixed World Heritage sites, which corresponds to Goal
4 of the Strategic Orientations. Its main conclusion was
that continuous monitoring of the state of conservation of
a site is an integral part of the conservation and
management process, and that the States Parties are
responsible for its implementation. In order to initiate
such a monitoring programme worldwide, Mr von Droste
pointed out, the World Heritage Centre proposes to convene,
in cooperation with the advisory bodies and UNESCO's Field
Offices, regional and sub-regional meetings of World
Heritage site managers.
V.10 Mr von Droste also briefly outlined the
promotional activities that had been carried out in the
past twelve months (Goal 5), informing the Committee of the
successful feedback which the World Heritage Centre
received regarding The World Heritage Newsletter and the
ongoing publishing and audiovisual projects such as the
Independent Image film series of World Heritage sites, the
Italian co-production of sixty video programmes on the
World Heritage properties and the non-commercial video
production by the Global Environmental Forum in Japan. In
the future, he underlined, particular importance will be
given to developing a high-quality data base on the
Convention's structure and functioning and top quality
mobile photo exhibits, on-site promotional activities and
the development of educational materials to be used in
schools and extra-curricula activities.
V.11 Furthermore, he informed the Committee of the
First General Assembly of the World Heritage Cities which
took place in Fez, Morocco, from 6 to 8 September 1993,
under the auspices of His Majesty King Hassan II and in the
*[6]
presence of the Director-General of UNESCO. The Assembly
was attended by the representatives of 56 World Heritage
cities and was preceded by a symposium on financing
presentation operations in World Heritage cities and was
also attended by representatives of UNDP, the World Bank,
the African Development Bank, Habitat, ICOMOS and other
international nongovernmental organizations. The next
General Assembly will be held in Bergen, Norway, in the
summer of 1995.
V.12 Mr von Droste concluded his report with a brief
review of the budgetary situation of the World Heritage
Fund. He suggested to the Committee to allocate
US$2,890,000 for the 1994 budget, and requested it to urge
all States Parties to pay their dues in time. Furthermore,
on the basis of Article 5.1 of the World Heritage Fund's
financial regulations, he proposed the establishment of a
Reserve Fund to be used for assistance requests linked to
disasters and natural calamities. He also asked the
Committee to consider changing the present annual budget to
a two-year budget.
V.13 Reminding the Committee of the World Heritage
Centre's principal tasks, Mr von Droste informed the
Committee of the rather critical staff situation of the
Centre, thanked the four States Parties, namely Germany,
Italy, Canada and the United States of America, for
seconding three professional staff and invited other States
Parties to help the Centre by seconding highly qualified
personnel.
VI. REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR OF THE SEVENTEENTH ORDINARY
AND SEVENTEENTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSIONS OF THE BUREAU
OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
VI.1 Mr Azedine Beschaouch (Tunisia), former
Rapporteur of the Committee, presented the report of the
seventeenth ordinary and extraordinary sessions of the
Bureau, the first held in Paris from 21 to 26 June 1993 and
the second held in Cartagena on 4 and 5 December 1993. At
the first meeting the Bureau discussed management and
staffing of the World Heritage Centre and it examined the
revised Operational Guidelines, taking into account the
Strategic Orientations adopted by the Committee at its
sixteenth session, including the proposals submitted by
Italy and the United States of America. It furthermore
discussed the methodological aspects of monitoring World
Heritage properties and established an ad hoc working group
comprising delegates from Brazil, China, Colombia, Germany,
Tunisia and the United States of America, and the
representatives of ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN and the UNDP/UNESCO
Regional Project to propose the framework, objectives,
agenda, tentative list of participants and a timeframe for
the expert meeting which was subsequently held in
Cambridge, United Kingdom, in November 1993.
*[7]
VI.2 Referring to the December 1993 meeting of the
Bureau, Mr Beschaouch provided a brief summary of the
recommendations of the Bureau regarding nominations. He
informed the Committee that the Bureau, having examined
those nominations which were referred back to the States
Parties by the Bureau session of June 1993, recommended the
inscription of one natural property (Shirakami-Sanchi,
Japan), one mixed property (Reserva del Vizcaino, Mexico)
which was divided into two nominations, one natural
(Refugio de Ballenas en las Lagunas de El Vizcaino) and the
other a cultural nomination (Pinturas rupestres de la
Sierra de San Francisco, B.C.S.) and twelve cultural
properties: Humayun's Tomb, Delhi; and Qutb Minar and its
monuments, Delhi (India); the Jesuit Missions (Paraguay);
the Baroque Churches (Philippines); Biertan, the Monastery
of Horezu, and the Churches of Moldavia (Romania);
Vlkolinec and Spissky Hrad (Slovak Republic); Coro and its
Port (Venezuela); Hué (Vietnam) and the Historic Town of
Zabid (Yemen).
VI.3 The Bureau recommended to defer the nomination of
the natural site St. Paul Subterranean National Park
(Philippines); confirmed the earlier deferral of Jiddat al
Harasis (Oman), and decided to defer the extension of the
World Heritage site of the Old City of Dubrovnik (Croatia)
until additional information is received from the State
Party. Regarding two other properties for which nominations
were referred back to the State Party or deferred in
earlier years and for which additional information has been
received, namely the Tongariro National Park (New Zealand)
and Bamberg (Germany), the Bureau decided to defer the
first nomination awaiting the outcome of an ICOMOS mission
report of November 1993, while in the case of Bamberg, it
decided to recommend to the Committee to inscribe the site,
having received the requested additional information.
VI.4 On both occasions, the Bureau also examined the
requests for international assistance and proposals meant
to improve the World Heritage accounting and budgeting.
The Bureau decided to recommend to the Committee to adopt
a biennial budget and to establish an Emergency Reserve of
US$ 1.0 million in order to reduce the present surplus of
the World Heritage Fund. Concluding this item, the Bureau
expressed its appreciation of the documents and the
budgetary transparency that they gave.
VI.5 With regard to the nomination of Lumbini, Nepal,
Mr Beschaouch recalled that the Bureau deferred this
nomination at its session in June 1993. The Bureau decided
to revise the text of its report of the seventeenth session
(page 38 English version) as follows: "The Bureau
recognized the very sacred character of this remarkable
group of sites associated with the life of the Lord Buddha
and considered that for this reason Lubini represented an
important source, not only for Buddhism but also in more
general terms for the cultural and spiritual history of
*[8]
humankind. However in view of the imperative need for this
group of sites to be preserved and for its management to be
assured in accordance with international standards, the
Committee recommended that the inscription of this property
on the World Heritage List should be deferred to allow the
relevant agencies of the Kingdom of Nepal to take
appropriate measures".
VII. MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND STAFFING OF THE
WORLD HERITAGE CENTRE
VII.1 The Delegate of the United States of America
expressed continuing concern regarding administration and
staff shortage at the World Heritage Centre. Reminding the
Committee that his country supported the creation of the
World Heritage Centre from the beginning, and that it had
seconded to it, jointly with Canada, a high-level
professional whose mandate had been extended for another
year, the Delegate of the United States proposed to the
Committee to consider addressing to the Director-General of
UNESCO a resolution urging him to: (i) strengthen the World
Heritage Centre's staff at a level of approximately ten
permanent professional posts with an appropriate balance of
support staff posts; (ii) delegate authority to the
Director of the World Heritage Centre to select appropriate
personnel; (iii) maintain the full staffing complement for
a sufficient period in order to demonstrate the full
potential of the Centre; (iv) provide additional funds to
the Centre from the Regular Programme and Budget for its
operational requirements, (v) streamline administrative
procedures for disbursements from the World Heritage Fund;
and (vi) clarify the role of internal advisory committees,
in order to avoid conflicting and duplicative mandates of
the Centre, and to establish the World Heritage Committee
as the authority for directing the Centre's annual workplan
and responsibilities. The Delegate concluded his statement
by suggesting that a group be created during this session
to formulate a proposal which would be submitted to the
Committee.
VII.2 The Delegate from Germany congratulated the
Director and the staff of the World Heritage Centre for its
excellent work which is becoming ever more demanding due to
the increasing success of the World Heritage Convention.
He therefore expressed support for the statement made by
the Representative of the United States of America.
VII.3 The Delegate of Thailand reminded the Committee
that his country had urged such action already in the past,
emphasizing that adequate financial and human resources
should be provided by UNESCO's Regular Programme. He
therefore supported the proposal of the United States of
America.
*[9]
VII.4 The Delegate of France, while expressing his
satisfaction with the work of the World Heritage Centre,
wished the Committee to consider what may be the
consequences should the Centre become more autonomous. In
his view three sets of issues needed to be examined: (i)
procedural, such as the question concerning a possibly
greater authority of the Centre's Director to recruit
staff; (ii) structural, e.g. would it be appropriate to
create a "satellite" network with decentralized World
Heritage units in different parts of the world; and (iii)
substantive, i.e. proposed changes could possibly lead to
a divorce between the Centre's policy and that of UNESCO.
VII.5 Replying to the debate, the Representative of the
Director-General of UNESCO, Mr Adnan Badran, first pointed
out that the creation of the World Heritage Centre as a
semi-autonomous entity had been a rather bold step on
UNESCO's part. The Steering Committee, he explained, was
not meant to interfere with the Centre's work, but rather
to mobilize the two UNESCO Sectors, which are its main
partners within the Organization, to achieve jointly with
the Centre, its goals, by pulling together financial and
human resources. The Centre has presently six professional
posts: two at Director level, one P.5, one P.4 and P.3 and
one P.1/2. Another P.4 (for culture) and a professional
post for administration will be added in the near future.
In addition to this, the World Heritage Centre is expected
to use UNESCO's Field Offices. Furthermore, the Centre's
partners such as ICCROM, ICOMOS, the IUCN and others
provide an important part of the services in implementing
the Convention. UNESCO's present policy is to use
consultants and NGO services for specific tasks rather than
to increase the Organization's staff. Mr Badran concluded
by saying that the Director-General is highly supportive of
the Centre and that advice which the Committee decides to
address to him on this matter will be welcome.
VII.6 The Chairperson thereupon proposed the creation
of a work group consisting of the new Bureau enlarged by
the Delegates of France, Germany and Italy, which would
report back to the Committee towards the end of this
session.
VII.7 The Delegate of Italy suggested that this group
should discuss the future of the Centre in a more complex
way, beyond the mere staff problems. This was supported by
the Delegate of Germany, who suggested that the work group
could define possible options as to how the World Heritage
Centre should develop in the coming years.
VII.8 Responding to these last interventions, Mr Badran
agreed that the suggestions which the Committee may wish to
address to the Director-General of UNESCO should foremost
endeavour to define the functional autonomy of the Centre
and how to use best existing structures. He reminded the
Committee in this respect that UNESCO gives presently to
*[10]
the Centre its main facilities, which is an important
contribution in kind.
VII.9 The Committee discussed further the management and
staffing of the World Heritage Centre after having taken
note of the proposal prepared by the working group
consisting of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Italy,
Senegal, Thailand and the United States of America. Based
on the conclusions of this working group, the Committee
agreed on the importance of the World Heritage Centre as a
unified body within the Secretariat of UNESCO. Furthermore,
the Committee underlined that the determination of needs on
staffing and funding levels can only be reached based on a
clarification of the role and functions of the Centre.
Having adopted the proposal of the Delegate of Colombia to
delete the word "systematic" in the third point of item 1
(d), and to add "States Parties" in the same sentence so as
to read: "coordination of monitoring of World Heritage
sites carried out by the States Parties, the advisory
bodies and other institutions, as requested by the
Committee", the Chairperson declared the text of the
working group adopted as amended by the proposal of
Colombia.
VII.10 The Committee requested the Chairperson to
transmit to the Director-General of UNESCO the proposal as
it now reads:
"Based on the conclusions of the working group, consisting
of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Italy, Senegal,
thailand and the United States of America, the Committee
agrees on the importance of the World Heritage Centre as a
unified body within the Secretariat of UNESCO.
The Committee believes that the determination of needs on
staffing and funding levels can only be reached based on a
clarification of the role and functions of the Centre.
1. The Committee believes the role and functions of the
Centre are as follows.
The Centre should:
(a) fulfil the function of Secretariat to the organs of
the 1972 Convention;
(b) act as a clearing house for the purpose of
coordination and information-sharing between the
Committee and other conventions, programmes and
international organizations related to the
conservation of natural and cultural heritage, as
requested by the Committee;
(c) oversee the implementation of training, monitoring,
and technical assistance by the States Parties, the
intergovernmental body ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN and other
NGOs, and cooperate with other units of UNESCO and its
Field Offices, as requested by the Committee;
*[11]
(d) be the primary instrument for facilitating the
implementation of the decisions of the Committee and
in this regard should be the primary contact with the
States Parties on all technical aspects of the
Convention, including:
(i) coordination of the inscription process;
(ii) assistance to and coordination of requests by
States Parties for training and technical
assistance, including evaluation of the results;
(iii) coordination of monitoring of the World Heritage
sites carried out by the States Parties, the
advisory bodies and other institutions, as
requested by the Committee;
(iv) organization of regular meetings and other
meetings as requested by the Committee;
(v) preparation of reports as directed by the
Committee;
(vi) development of draft proposals for technical
guidelines to improve the effectiveness of the
Convention as requested by the Committee;
(vii) preparation of the budget for the Committee's
approval;
(viii) disbursement of funds in a timely manner.
(e) implement plans and seek partnerships to increase
materials promoting the Convention, as directed by the
Committee and in accordance with the goals and
policies of UNESCO.
2. Therefore, the Committee expresses its strong concern
that every effort be made to secure funding and staff
necessary to perform adequately the above tasks. The
Committee requests the Director-General to take this
concern into consideration for further action."
VII.11 The Representative of the Director-General of
UNESCO, thereupon made a statement emphasizing that with
respect to the document presented by the working group, it
had to be clearly stated that the Director-General of
UNESCO is bound to abide strictly to the provisions of the
1972 Convention. Article 14, para. 1, of the Convention
provides that "a Secretariat appointed by the Director-
General of UNESCO" shall assist the Committee and that
UNESCO will continue to do so. The Convention also provides
in para. 2 of Article 14 that "the Director-General of
UNESCO utilizing to the fullest extent possible the
services of the International Centre for the Study of the
Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property
(ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites
(ICOMOS), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), in their
respective areas of competence and capability, shall
prepare the Committee's documentation and the agenda of its
meetings and shall have the responsibility for the
implementation of its decisions". Accordingly, he pointed
out, the UNESCO Secretariat - of which the World Heritage
*[12]
Centre is a part - will work closely, as it had done in the
past, with the intergovernmental organization ICCROM, the
NGOs, such as IUCN, ICOMOS and others, in the
implementation of the decisions of the Committee. In this
regard, UNESCO is bound also to respect the directives
issued and the decisions taken by the General Conference of
UNESCO. Concluding his statement, Mr Bouchenaki underlined
that the Director-General and the Secretariat of UNESCO,
both at Headquarters and in the field, will make every
effort - as they have done for World Heritage sites in the
past - to harmonize contributions from various partners
such as the UNDP, FIT, voluntary contributions, associate
experts, and bilateral inputs.
VII.12 Upon the proposal of the Delegate of Japan, the
above statement of the Representative of the Director-
General of UNESCO was to be included in the Final Report of
the session.
VIII. ELECTION OF A BUDGET SUB-COMMITTEE
VIII.1 The Secretary of the Committee, Mr von Droste,
first explained the rationale for setting-up a budget sub-
committee, pointing out that its main tasks would be to (i)
review the statement of the accounts; (ii) fix the
budgetary ceiling; (iii) establish a reserve fund and (iv)
allocate amounts to each budgetary line. Thereupon the
Committee decided that the Sub-Committee would consist of
the members of the previous and the new Bureau. It was
asked to report to the Committee before the end of the
session. (See Part XII of the Report.)
IX. EXAMINATION OF METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF
MONITORING OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF WORLD
HERITAGE CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES
IX.1 The Secretariat introduced the working document
WHC-93/CONF.002/4 and recalled that the World Heritage
Committee at its sixteenth session in Santa Fe requested
the Centre to convene an expert meeting on the methodology
of monitoring. The working document outlines the main
conclusions of the expert meeting that was held at the
World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, U.K.,
from 1 to 4 November 1993. The report of this meeting was
made available to the Committee as information document
WHC-93/CONF.2/INF.5.
IX.2 The Secretariat emphasized that this document is
a progress report reflecting the present state of
achievement in a long process of defining the concept of
monitoring. In this context, it was noted that three types
of monitoring could be distinguished:
*[13]
- Systematic monitoring: the continuous process of
monitoring the conditions of World Heritage sites with
periodic reporting on its state of conservation.
- Administrative monitoring: follow up actions by the
World Heritage Centre to ensure the implementation of
recommendations and decisions of the World Heritage
Committee and Bureau at the time of inscription or at
a later date.
- Ad hoc monitoring: the reporting by the Centre, other
sectors of UNESCO and the advisory bodies to the
Bureau and the Committee on the state of conservation
of specific World Heritage sites that are under
threat. Ad hoc reports and impact studies are
necessary each time exceptional circumstances occur or
work is undertaken which may have an affect on the
state of conservation of the sites.
As regards systematic monitoring, the Secretariat
emphasized that in the spirit of the Convention, it is the
prime responsibility of the States Parties to put in place
on-site monitoring arrangements as an integral component of
day-to-day conservation and management of the sites. At the
same time, however, it is considered essential that
external and independent professional advisers are involved
in a periodic reporting system. This reporting system
should not only be addressed to site managers and national
authorities, but should also lead to improved World
Heritage assistance and decision-making. A regional or
national approach is recommended for systematic monitoring
so as to optimize its impact. For each of the national or
regional programmes the most appropriate partners should be
identified. The established monitoring framework should be
reviewed and, if necessary, adapted to the particular
conditions of the region.
IX.3 Several delegates commended the results of the
expert meeting and noted that it had elevated the thinking
on monitoring considerably. However, it was emphasized in
the discussions that the involvement of the States Parties
is essential in further developing the concept of
monitoring. In this respect, the Delegate of Italy
underlined the importance which must be given to the
carrying out of impact studies and ad hoc reports each time
exceptional circumstances occur. It was also noted that,
a monitoring methodology should on the one hand be
applicable to all sites and should therefore have
scientific rigour, while on the other, it should be
sufficiently flexible so as to respond to regional and
national characteristics, available technical expertise and
their economic and cultural conditions and identities.
*[14]
IX.4 The Committee discussed the necessity to
establish, at the time of inscription, comprehensive
baseline information and that particular attention should
be paid to the collection and management of data and
documentation. The costs of implementing a baseline
information collection should be estimated in advance,
particularly for the developing countries. The Delegate of
Colombia remarked that the establishment and operation of
monitoring systems would require the development of
comprehensive cooperation programmes. She therefore
suggested that when developing a monitoring methodology,
the cost estimate should take into consideration such
programmes. Furthermore, the expert meetings should
include participants from developing countries to help
define feasible monitoring systems.
IX.5 Following the discussion, the Committee invited
the States Parties to put on-site monitoring arrangements
in place as an integral part of site conservation and
management, and to report to the Committee on the actions
taken to implement this.
IX.6 The Committee also endorsed the recommendations
made by the Centre and asked it to form a small working
group of experts from States Parties and the advisory
bodies which would, on the basis of the observations made
by the Committee, undertake the following actions:
- establish guidelines for baseline information and its
collection and management;
- revise the nomination and evaluation procedures and
process to secure baseline information at the time of
inscription of sites on the World Heritage List;
- establish a format for periodic reporting;
- prepare a draft text on monitoring and its procedures
for inclusion in the Operational Guidelines;
- determine, jointly with ICCROM, ICOMOS, and IUCN, the
need for training in monitoring;
- estimate the costs to States Parties of the
implementation of a systematic monitoring programme
and look into possibilities of assistance to States
Parties;
- establish a small unit at the World Heritage Centre to
oversee the implementation of a systematic monitoring
and reporting system.
IX.7 The Committee invited the Centre to report to the
Bureau at its eighteenth session on the results of the
above activities so that the Committee could take concrete
and precise decisions on this matter.
*[15]
IX.8 The Secretary informed the Committee that
parallel to the implementation of the above activities,
regional monitoring activities would be promoted, such as
the completion of the Latin American monitoring programme
which should result in a regional state of conservation
report in 1994. Furthermore, it is foreseen that regional
seminars for site managers will also be held in 1994 in
different regions. In this way, it is expected that the
further development of the monitoring system will benefit
directly from the practical implementation of monitoring
programmes and will be firmly grounded in local and
national experiences.
X. MONITORING AND REPORTING OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION
OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES
X.1 The Secretary introduced the documents prepared for
the session:
- WHC-93/CONF.002/5 and /5Add.1 "Monitoring of the state
of conservation of World Heritage cultural and natural
properties" and WHC-93/CONF.002/5Add. "List of
monitoring documents sent by States Parties to the
World Heritage Centre".
- Monitoring of the State of Conservation. Report
prepared by IUCN, 1 December 1993.
- Report on the State of Conservation of Properties
inscribed on the World Heritage List, ICOMOS, November
1993.
- Monitoring and follow-up 1991/1994 of World Heritage
sites in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa of
lusophone expression, Progress Report 1993 and
Outlook. Prepared by the Regional Project for
Cultural, Urban and Environmental Heritage,
UNDP/UNESCO, December 1993.
Natural Properties
X.2 The Representative of IUCN presented a monitoring
report and outlined the seven-step monitoring procedure of
IUCN. He drew the attention of the Committee to the state
of conservation reports on eleven sites, eight of which
have been prepared with the assistance of IUCN field
offices. Furthermore, the World Heritage Centre presented
state of conservation reports on two sites, Mount Nimba
(Guinea) and Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia) based
on missions carried out by the Centre in May and September
1993.
Sangay National Park (Ecuador)
The Representative of IUCN recalled that the site was
inscribed in 1983 and added to the List of World Heritage
in Danger in 1992 due to threats from poachers, boundary
encroachment and unplanned road construction. A field
*[16]
mission was conducted by IUCN's Office in Ecuador and the
Committee discussed the proposed six-point action plan
including the recommendation that an environmental impact
assessment of the road construction be undertaken. The
technical assistance request for Sangay National Park (US$
28,500) will be reviewed in the light of the findings of
the IUCN field review. The Centre is requested to transmit
the Committee's concerns about the impact of the new road
to the authorities in Ecuador.
Tikal National Park (Guatemala)
The Committee noted the prospects to expand the size of the
site from 57,400 ha to 85,000 ha to include a substantial
area of undisturbed natural forest and that a buffer zone
project on agroforestry is being carried out with funding
from Danish Government sources (DANIDA). The Centre is
requested to send a letter to the authorities in Guatemala
informing them of the opportunity which exists to apply for
assistance for the preparation of a new nomination
incorporating all the new elements of the site, both
cultural and natural.
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India)
The Committee recalled that the site was inscribed on the
List of World Heritage in Danger at its sixteenth session
in 1992 due to threats caused by the encroachment of the
Bodo tribe. No response had been received from the
Government of India to several letters transmitting the
Committee's previous requests for information since 1990.
The Director of the World Heritage Centre informed the
Committee furthermore, that a mission to India was
undertaken by a staff member of the Centre to contact the
authorities directly. The Committee had an extensive
discussion on the action to be taken, including the
possibility of delisting the site. Several delegates voiced
their concerns about the failure of the Government of India
to respond to the Committee's request. However, the present
situation makes a site mission impossible. The Committee
agreed to take further steps: (i) to request the Director-
General of UNESCO to express, by letter to the Prime
Minister of India, the Committee's concern; and ii) that
other diplomatic channels be used to transmit the
Committee's concerns about the continuing threats to Park
values by the invasion of the Bodo tribe, as well as
subsequent encroachments and poaching activities.
Royal Chitwan National Park (Nepal)
On the basis of a detailed report provided by the IUCN
Office in Nepal, a state of conservation report on this
site was presented. A number of threats were noted
*[17]
including poaching of the rhinoceros and tiger populations
in the Park. It was further noted that the 1976 Management
Plan does not address many of the current management issues
and thus urgently requires updating. The new legislation
providing for a buffer zone around the Park is, however, a
commendable step and should be implemented as soon as
possible. The Committee requested the Centre to contact the
appropriate authorities to encourage them to continue the
process underway with regard to the buffer zone concept and
to begin the preparation of a new Management Plan.
Air et Ténéré National Nature Reserve (Niger)
The Committee recalled that the site was inscribed on the
List of World Heritage in Danger at its session in 1992.
The Committee noted that very little could be done until
political negotiations are concluded. It was further noted
that the Centre had sent condolences to the families of the
reserve staff who were killed during the civil disturbances
at the site.
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal)
The Representative of IUCN informed the Committee that the
road project was almost completed and that the University
of Dakar had finished an environmental assessment study on
the impacts of the road construction. A donors' round table
was held in June and has led to a project supported by the
French Government for the future management of the Park.
The Centre was requested to transmit the Committee's views
to the appropriate authorities in Senegal and to be kept
informed about the long-term effects of the improved road
access on the Park. In the light of the fortieth
anniversary of the Park in 1994, the Centre was asked to
collaborate with the Park authorities in marking this
event.
Sinharaja Forest Reserve (Sri Lanka)
The Committee recalled that this site is protected as a
National Wilderness Area and had been listed on the World
Heritage List since 1988. There are many incremental
threats to the site, but the Committee noted that a
Management Plan to address these had been completed. It was
further noted that continued monitoring of the site should
be implemented as a priority activity of the Plan.
The Committee noted the contribution of the Government of
Norway of US$ 600,000 over a four-year period for the
implementation of the Plan. The Committee asked the Centre
to congratulate the administrators for their efforts in
completing a Management Plan for the site and to urge them
to give close attention to monitoring encroachments.
*[18]
Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)
The Committee recalled that the site was removed from the
List of World Heritage in Danger in 1990 and noted the
recommendations and discussion of the seventeenth session
of the Bureau concerning uncontrolled cultivation in the
conservation area. Technically, this cultivation is not
permissible under the legislation for the area and much
damage to natural values had been caused.
The Director of the World Heritage Centre and the Director
of the UNESCO Division of Physical Heritage provided
information regarding the situation of the site's cultural
heritage (Olduvai Gorge), and particularly regarding the
serious threats to the footprints of early man. The
Committee was informed that a project by the Getty
Conservation Institute was underway to protect this
priceless cultural heritage.
The Committee discussed the possibility of including the
site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It was noted
that the Government of Germany provided US$ 275,000 for the
preparation of a new Management Plan for the site.
Finally, the Committee requested the Centre to report back
at the next session of its Bureau in 1994 regarding the
protection of the cultural values of the site. The Centre
should also transmit to the Government of Tanzania the
Committee's serious concerns regarding the ongoing
cultivation which threatens the natural values of this
property.
Virunga National Park (Zaire)
IUCN reported on the difficult social and economic
situation which is creating serious negative impacts on
Virunga National Park. However, the emergency assistance
project funded by the World Heritage Fund and carried out
by WWF since its approval by the Bureau in June 1993, had
positive effects for the protection of the site. The
Committee discussed in detail the impact of listing the
site on the List of World Heritage in Danger and IUCN
confirmed that Virunga National Park would definitely be a
candidate for this procedure. After considerable discussion
and a vote, the Committee agreed to address a letter to the
Zairois authorities underlining serious concern for the
protection and management of the site, particularly the
serious recurring encroachments, and suggesting to the
Government of Zaire to consider preparing a technical
assistance request.
*[19]
Victoria Falls National Park (Zimbabwe/Zambia)
IUCN reported about the proposed construction of a dam
(Batoka Gorge Hydro Power Scheme), which would not affect
the Falls but would have a serious impact on the lower
gorges, changing the character of the site from a turbulent
river to a hydroelectric reservoir. The Committee was
informed about an environmental impact assessment to which
the IUCN Office in Harare was contributing technical
assistance. The Committee requested the Centre to invite
the authorities of both Zimbabwe and Zambia to activate the
joint Victoria Falls World Heritage Management Committee in
order to promote a coordinated approach to manage this
transfrontier site. The Committee also asked to be kept
informed of the possible dam project.
Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia)
The Centre informed the Committee that a mission was
carried out in September 1993 in cooperation with IUCN to
Plitvice Lakes National Park. The report noted the
continuing cooperation of the authorities in the region as
well as that of the United Nations Protection Forces
(UNPROFOR). The report underlined the current situation
whereby the natural values of the Park are intact and
essentially recovering. There was no evidence of new damage
to the Park as a result of the ongoing war in the region.
However, social tension had increased and the economic
crisis deepened. The mission team was unable to visit the
Korkaova Uvala virgin forest because of military mines on
the access roads. The Committee took note of the report.
Mount Nimba Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)
The Committee recalled that this site was inscribed on the
List of World Heritage in Danger at its sixteenth session
in 1992. In its presentation, IUCN continued to stress its
concern over the long-term risks associated with potential
mining operations adjacent to the World Heritage site. It
further noted the growing population pressure in the
region.
Recalling that a comprehensive report had been submitted to
the Bureau in June 1993, the Secretariat highlighted
several developments which occurred since the mission in
May 1993. A corrected and revised boundary proposal had
been submitted by the Government of Guinea in late November
1993. The boundaries correspond to those recommended by the
mission and incorporate an area of 17,749 ha. Furthermore,
a draft legislation was received in late November 1993
concerning the establishment of an Environmental
Conservation Centre to be located on the site in order to
coordinate conservation and protection measures in the
region.
*[20]
An additional technical assistance request for US$ 45,000
for the continuing implementation of the mission
recommendations relating to the conservation and protection
of the site was received. The Committee concurred with
findings of the report and took note of the technical
assistance request.
Everglades National Park (United States of America)
The Committee recalled that the damage caused to the site
by Hurricane Andrew on 24 August 1992 was discussed at the
sixteenth session of the Committee. Further discussion on
the ecological impacts took place at the seventeenth
session of the Bureau. IUCN reported that it had not been
able to carry out a site mission.
The United States Delegation informed the Committee that
the Superintendent of the Everglades National Park was
present and that he would be pleased to present a report.
The Superintendent indicated that a significant number of
threats to the Park have existed since the time of its
listing in 1979. These are still present, including
alterations to the hydrological regime as well as impacts
from adjacent urban growth. Several new threats, both man-
made and natural, have aggravated conditions since the
initial listing. These include increased nutrient pollution
from agricultural activities, reduced water levels from
flood control operations and mercury contamination of fish
and wildlife. In addition, there had been a dramatic
ecological deterioration of Florida Bay, as well as the
severe effects of Hurricane Andrew. In response to these
conditions, substantial Government actions have been
initiated in recent years. Legal actions and negotiations
to resolve nutrient pollution are very close to a
successful conclusion. An addition of 107,000 acres to
protect the north-eastern part of the Park has been
incorporated. Structural changes in the water management
regime to restore the water level in the north-eastern
addition are underway. Experiments are being carried out
with respect to optimum water deliveries.
The Government provided 4.5 million US$ for monitoring and
research, as well as a significant increase in other
management funding. A major new emphasis and commitment has
also been undertaken to accomplish long-term restoration
through ecosystem management of the entire south Florida
system. This brought all appropriate federal agencies
together in a collaborative effort which should shortly
include state and local governments.
In conclusion, the report stated that the outcome of these
efforts was by no means certain, however the outlook was
hopeful. At the request of the Chair, IUCN underlined its
agreement with the report given and suggested that the
Everglades National Park should be a candidate for the List
of World Heritage in Danger.
*[21]
After considerable discussion, the Committee agreed to
include the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger
and asked the Centre to communicate with the appropriate
authorities. The Committee recognized the extensive
research and other work underway to alleviate the threats
to the Everglades National Park. It therefore congratulated
the Government of the United States of America on the new
initiatives it had taken and encouraged it to continue its
efforts to restore the ecological balance of the Everglade
ecosystem. IUCN was invited to monitor and assess the
results of the restorative efforts.
Cultural Properties
X.3 State of conservation reports on cultural
heritage were presented by the Secretariat, ICOMOS and the
Regional Project for the Cultural, Urban and Environmental
Heritage of UNDP/UNESCO.
X.4 The Director of the Regional Project UNDP/UNESCO
introduced the methodology applied in the monitoring
programme for Latin America, the Caribbean and Lusophone
Africa, highlighting the continuous revision of the
methodology in consultation with the consultants involved
in the monitoring programme and on the basis of the earlier
monitoring experiences and feedback from the States
Parties. The progress report presented to the Committee
includes follow-up to the monitoring undertaken in 1991
(Antigua Guatemala, Ouro Preto, Cartagena, Machu Picchu,
San Francisco de Lima and Quito) and 1992 (Salvador de
Bahia, Portobelo/San Lorenzo, San Juan de Puerto Rico,
Olinda and Tikal). The progress report also includes the
full monitoring reports on the 15 sites that were monitored
in 1993. Recommendations for each of the sites were
presented in the monitoring report, the most salient of
which are the following:
Antigua Guatemala, Guatemala
A comprehensive plan for the integral conservation and
rehabilitation of the city should be prepared, particularly
in relation to traffic flow, tourism and housing. Such a
plan should lead to projects for urban rehabilitation and
tourism development. A further concern is the state of
conservation of the numerous ruins in the city that are in
danger of collapse in the event of an earthquake.
Historic Town of Ouro Preto, Brazil
Important measures were taken by the municipal authorities
to improve the traffic flow in the city and extensive work
has been done to shore-up the hill slopes around the city.
National and international tourism creates certain problems
*[22]
and an integral rehabilitation plan would have to be
developed so as to improve the effects of tourism.
Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena,
Colombia
World Heritage assistance has led to the preparation of a
municipal legislation for the historical centre. Further
assistance was approved by the Bureau for the preparation
of a Master Plan for the centre in relation to an overall
urban development plan. The Committee was informed of the
plans to construct a new bridge, the Heredia Bridge,
between the town and Fort San Felipe, just outside the
ramparts of the city. This bridge would seriously affect
the visual aspect of the site and would disrupt the visual
and functional relation between the Fort and the town. The
Committee recommended that the local and national
authorities study carefully the traffic situation in and
around the historical centre, and to consider possible
alternatives for the bridge.
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, Peru
As part of the assistance provided by the World Heritage
Fund, an international archaeological seminar was held in
September 1993 with the participation of national and
international experts and bilateral cooperating agencies.
The seminar concluded that coordination should be improved
among institutions dealing with the Park's management, that
an inventory of the cultural and natural resources should
be pursued and that archaeological research and
conservation actions should be redefined. The preparation
of an operational plan for the Park should be of the
highest priority.
San Francisco de Lima, Peru
Restoration of this convent, now forming part of the site
of the Historical Centre of Lima, continues with the
support of national agencies and bilateral cooperation.
Improvement of the environment of the convent will be
undertaken in the context of a major rehabilitation plan
for the Historical Centre of Lima.
City of Quito, Ecuador
A master plan for the historical centre is in preparation
and numerous restoration works have been undertaken over
the past years. Advice on the structural reinforcement of
some of the churches will be provided in 1994 with the
financial support of the World Heritage Fund. Restricted
financial resources, however, have slowed down the
restoration programme.
*[23]
Salvador de Bahia, Brazil
Major works are in progress for the restoration and renewal
of the historic city, particularly the Pelourinho area. The
new functions of this area and the relocation of its
inhabitants is of great concern. Involvement of the
cultural heritage and planning institutions is required.
With World Heritage support, an international team of
experts, together with local and regional authorities, will
look into this matter in early 1994.
Portobelo-San Lorenzo, Panama
The state of conservation of the site had beens studied by
an expert mission in 1993. The mission concluded that the
Fortress of San Lorenzo was in an acceptable state of
conservation, although stone conservation requires some
special attention. The city of Portobelo is under pressure
from increased population and deficient infrastructure. An
action plan was drawn up for the execution of the necessary
archaeological survey before construction works are
undertaken in the town. Underwater excavations should not
be considered as a priority.
La Fortaleza and San Juan Historic Site, Puerto Rico,
United States of America
Conservation operations in San Juan are of high quality and
well carried out in collaboration with the Park Service. No
specific problem areas were identified.
Historic Centre of the Town of Olinda, Brazil
Olinda has been included in a major IDB-funded tourism
development project for the north-east of Brazil.
Management and conservation of the cultural heritage
resources in the context of the urban cultural and tourism
development in Olinda should therefore require special
attention.
Tikal National Park, Guatemala
A well structured management plan for the Park as a whole
was required. Stone and stucco conservation was of concern
and the creation of an in-situ stone conservation
laboratory should be considered. Sub-regional cooperation
with other archaeological sites (e.g. Copan) should be
promoted.
*[24]
City of Potosi, Bolivia
Sanitation of the river La Ribera was considered a priority
as this affects both the historic fabric and the health of
the population. Furthermore, special attention is required
for the restoration and upgrading of the housing stock and
the archaeological industrial heritage. The capacity of the
municipality to enforce protective legislation should be
increased. World Heritage assistance for the conservation
of recently discovered mural paintings in La Merced should
be considered. Implementation of such assistance could be
facilitated through already existing training facilities.
Historic City of Sucre, Bolivia
The City of Sucre was judged as relatively well preserved
and the awareness of the city's values well developed. The
development plan for Sucre would, however, need to
reinforce aspects of cultural heritage preservation.
City of Cusco, Peru
Major urban rehabilitation projects were underway. The
designs for the Plaza de Armas and the archaeological area
around Qoricancha has to be carried out by specialists of
the highest level and discussed thoroughly with the local
and the scientific and professional communities.
Institutional cooperation between the municipality and the
Institute for Culture would have to be improved,
particularly in relation to the Qoricancha project.
Colonial City of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
A Master Plan for the Colonial City had been prepared
reflecting an integral view on conservation including
social and urban issues. This plan has to be adopted and
implemented, and special attention has to be given to
housing rehabilitation. The tourism development programme
'Cuna de America' is intended to stimulate cultural tourism
whilst controlling its negative side effects.
Old Havana and its Fortifications, Cuba
In spite of a very well developed institutional structure,
conservation efforts are seriously hindered under the
present conditions in Cuba. A severe hurricaine struck Cuba
in March 1993 causing serious damage to the site. Emergency
assistance was underway for the restoration of the
buildings surrounding the La Plaza Vieja. The monitoring
mission recommended that World Heritage assistance be given
to housing rehabilitation. The Committee commended the
efforts of the State Party to safeguard the city and the
*[25]
important role on the national and regional level of the
National Conservation Centre.
Trinidad and the Valley de los Ingenios, Cuba
It was reported that the town of Trinidad is generally well
conserved, although shortage of specific building materials
caused some problems. It is advisable to plan restoration
of archaeological and architectural sites within a global
plan, which would also take into account tourism
development as well as proposed hydraulic projects.
Brasilia, Brazil
The protected zone of Brasilia named "El Poligono" was
deemed well preserved in spite of considerable population
growth. Conservation interests and urban development have
to be fully integrated. The Committee was informed that
Brazil intends to organize and host an international forum
on the conservation of this 35-year old city. The Committee
welcomed this important and appropriate initiative.
Island of Mozambique, Mozambique
A detailed programme for the recuperation of the island of
Mozambique had been prepared by the national authorities,
including aspects such as infrastructure, social, economic
and cultural development, tourism, housing, education and
archaeology. International and bilateral cooperation was
being sought for the implementation of the recuperation
plan and it was recommended to organize a donor conference.
Maya Site of Copan, Honduras
Studies and works in Copan are generally conducted
according to high scientific standards. Special attention
should be paid to the conservation of stone and stuccos.
The original sculptures will be placed in a site museum and
the replicas on the original sites. It is recommended to
redefine the boundaries of the "Copan Archaeological Park"
and to prepare an extension of the site. Furthermore, the
management plan for the site should be updated.
Chan Chan Archaeological Zone, Peru
Conservation and maintainance of this very extensive
archaeological site requires continuous efforts. Continued
research on conservation techniques for adobe structures is
necessary. An interregional training course on adobe
conservation was in preparation between ICCROM, CRAterre,
and the Regional Project. The issue of invasions and land
*[26]
occupation by farmers needs to be addressed immediately in
order to rapidly and permanently reclaim and secure the
site's intangible zone.
Chavin (Archaeological Site), Peru
Due to the remoteness of this site and the lack of
sufficient human and financial resources, it required major
technical cooperation. The site is subject to ongoing
deterioration that could only be reversed by integral site
management. Emergency assistance is required for cleaning
and maintaining the site and treatment of the stone
reliefs.
Sanctuary of Bom Jesus do Congonhas, Brazil
In general, the ensemble of Bom Jesus do Congonhas had been
well preserved. However, architecture of mediocre quality
has a negative affect on the surroundings of the site.
Furthermore, regarding the physical state of conservation,
specific problems were identified in parts of the woodwork
in the main ship of the church and the mural paintings
inside the chapel. Measures have to be taken to improve
this situation.
Jesuit Missions of Guaranis, Argentina/Brazil
The Missions of Guaranis are nowadays used for tourist
purposes and research. They are located in an aggressive
natural environment. The successful restoration of the
Missions on Brazilian territory was almost completed.
Regarding the Argentina missions, restoration activities
have focused on one mission, San Ignacio Mini. A more
global approach was recommended as well as increased sub-
regional cooperation. The Brazilian Delegation informed
the Committee that steps towards such cooperation were
already being taken by the countries of MERCOSUR
(Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay).
Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos, Bolivia
While in the beginning of the twentieth century emphazis
was laid on reconstruction, in later years attention
gradually shifted to the restoration of authentic elements.
Because the missions are located within villages,
modernization constitutes a permanent threat to the site.
Legal protection had therefore to be strengthened.
National Historic Park - Citadelle, Sans Souci, Ramiers,
Haiti
A major ISPAN/UNDP/UNESCO project considerably contributed
to the preservation and enhancement of the site and
*[27]
training of local personnel. The present economic and
social situation has caused a serious decline in funding.
But minimum and regular maintenance is being ensured by the
national institute, ISPAN. Legal protection and management
should be improved. Consolidation of the Sans Souci Palace
and the rehabilitation of the Royal Gardens is required.
The Committee commended the Regional Project for the
pioneer role in setting up this regional monitoring
programme and the involvement of regional structures and
experts. Several delegates expressed their interest in
similar programmes being initiated in other regions,
particularly Africa and Asia, drawing upon the experiences
in Latin America. The Committee took note that the regional
monitoring programme would be concluded in 1994 with the
publication of a regional state of conservation report.
X.5 The Secretariat informed the Committee on the
state of conservation of the following sites:
Delphi, Greece
In response to recommendations made by the Bureau in June
1993, the Greek authorities informed that no permission had
been granted for the construction of an olive packing unit
within the protection Zone A.
Samos, Greece
The Greek authorities informed the Bureau at its
seventeenth session that a road project would be undertaken
under the supervision of the Ministry of Culture and that
this project would not endanger the site nor the Eupalinos
Tunnel. The Central Archaeological Council recently
informed the Centre that the proposed road project has been
rejected. The municipality was therefore studying
alternative solutions that would not affect the protected
area.
Historic Centre of Puebla, Mexico
The Secretariat informed the Committee that several letters
had been received on a tourism development project that
would imply the demolition of historic buildings. The
Delegate of Mexico informed the Committee that a decree had
been published in the Official Journal of Puebla on 13
August 1993 for the elaboration of an Urban Development
Plan, and not a Tourist Development Plan, for a specific
sector of the town, and that this was an urban instrument
defined by the General Law for Human Settlements, according
to standards set by the Ministry of Social Development
(SEDESOL).
*[28]
This partial plan comprised the establishment of a project
which was being elaborated by the Municipality of Puebla
and which would be presented for discussion and eventual
adoption during the first half of 1994, according to a
report in the local press.
Therefore, according to the Delegate, it was not possible
to discuss a project which does not yet exist, as there
have been proposals and counter proposals and these would
be evaluated in 1994.
Furthermore, with regard to the monitoring of sites, the
Mexican authorities presented in October 1992 a report on
the six first sites inscribed on the World Heritage List,
amongst which was Puebla. In order to update and complete
this report, a second report was to be presented, not only
on these six properties but on the ten properties already
inscribed. This work is expected to be completed in 1994
and would be presented to the Bureau session in July.
Old Town of Avila, Spain
In October 1993 the Centre was informed of a project to
construct a new bridge over the river Rio Adajo just
outside the historic walls of the city and close to the
Roman bridge. ICOMOS reported that the bridge would
directly affect the view on the city. The Spanish
Delegation informed the Committee that complementary
information from the municipal authorities was expected and
that as soon as this was available, the Centre would
receive a report in this respect. The Committee expressed
its concern on this matter and requested the Centre to
inform the municipal authorities, and ask them to study
other possibilities of solving the traffic flow.
Burgos Cathedral, Spain
The Committee took note of the information received from
the national and local authorities, that confirm the
creation of an Advisory Council for the Cathedral with the
participation of the Ministry of Culture, regional and
local authorities, the university and others. This Council
established a Master Plan for the Cathedral in which
priorities were defined for all restoration works and other
interventions.
Hadrian's Wall, United Kingdom
The Committee expressed its concern regarding the project
for a trail on top of Hadrian's Wall which would affect the
archaeological values of the site and requested the Centre
to inform the United Kingdom authorities accordingly.
*[29]
X.6 Several delegates informed the Committee on the
situation in specific World Heritage sites in their
countries.
Hanseatic City of Lubeck, Germany
The Delegate of Germany informed the Committee that the
invitation to ICOMOS to visit the Hanseatic City of Lubeck
had been postponed until after the upcoming municipal
elections.
Bahla Fort, Oman
The Delegate of Oman informed the Committee that the
authorities were studying the necessary restoration works
of the Bahla Fort and that a report would be presented to
the Centre as soon as possible.
Santa Maria Maggiore/San Giovanni Laterano, Holy See
The Observer of the Holy See informed the Committee that
over the last years extensive conservation work has been
carried out in the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore. The
Observer also gave details of a terrorist attack which
damaged the Basilique of San Giovanni Laterano. The
Committee expressed its concern about the cultural heritage
being the object of terrorist actions and transmitted its
sympathy to the Vatican authorities.
Pueblo de Taos, United States of America
The Committee recalled that ICOMOS reported to the Bureau
at its seventeenth session on the state of conservation of
Pueblo de Taos. The Committee took note of the information
received from the Governor of Pueblo de Taos and expressed
its concern about threats to the site and local traditions,
particularly the proposed extension of Taos Airport. The
Committee requested the Centre to communicate these
concerns to the Government of the United States, asking for
detailed information on the conservation and management of
the site.
Kasbah of Algiers, Algeria
The outgoing Rapporteur presented to the Committee the main
content of the report prepared by the Algerian authorities,
and informed that legislative measures and urban
enhancement were already underway or in preparation for the
safeguard and rehabilitation of the Kasbah of Algiers.
*[30]
This report was transmitted to ICOMOS for evaluation and
monitoring.
Auschwitz Concentration Camp, Poland
Following remarks made by the Observer of Tunisia, the
Committee recommended that the Centre examines the
integrity of this property inscribed on the World Heritage
List in 1979 and informs the next session of the Bureau.
X.7 The Director of the Division of Physical Heritage
presented to the members of the Committee progress reports
concerning various on-going operational projects for World
Heritage properties.
Angkor, Cambodia
A new Government had been constituted and was actively
pursuing cooperation with their partners of the
international community towards national reconstruction and
development. The UNESCO Secretariat has made every effort
to assist the new government in meeting the commitments
which the Head of State, His Majesty Norodom Sihanouk, had
made at the time of inscription of Angkor on the List of
World Heritage in Danger.
On the first recommendation set out by the Committee at the
time of inscription: enactment of adequate protective
legislation, the following had been achieved:
1. the new Cambodian Constitution has specific articles
(Articles 69, 70, 71) making the protection of national
cultural heritage a duty of the State, and declaring
designated national and World Heritage sites to be combat-
free zones;
2. the cultural property protection laws, prepared with
the technical assistance of UNESCO which were adopted as
Decisions of the Supreme National Council of Cambodia on 10
February 1993, were expected to be presented to the
National Assembly in the near future for review and
official legislation;
3. in November 1993 the Ministry of Environment issued
the "Decree on the Creation and Designation of Protected
Areas", thereby establishing a national system of protected
areas. This Decree was expected to be presented to the
National Assembly for consideration and eventual enactment
as law. UNESCO and the IUCN Representatives in Cambodia
were assisting the authorities concerned in refining the
text to take into consideration the protection of cultural
landscapes which are particularly relevant in the context
of large cultural sites in Cambodia, such as Angkor.
*[31]
As regards the second recommendation of the Committee,
namely the establishment of a national protection agency,
the new government had officially informed UNESCO that the
NHPAC Statutes, as adopted by the Supreme National Council
of Cambodia (SNC) on 10 February 1993, would be amended to
reflect the new situation of Cambodia and to serve as the
basis of establishing an adequate national protection
agency.
Under the chairmanship of the Minister of State in charge
of Cultural Affairs, the Royal Government of Cambodia had
provisionally established an inter-ministerial Supreme
Council of National Culture to resolve day-to-day matters
and to define the mandate and authority of the appropriate
national protection agency to be established.
As regards the third and fourth recommendations of the
Committee, namely the establishment of permanent boundaries
and of meaningful buffer zones, as the report to the June
Bureau session indicated, UNESCO and the Cambodian
authorities have been executing a project entitled the ZEMP
"Zoning and Environmental Management Plan" financed by
UNDP, the Government of Sweden and others.
The ZEMP project team, composed of 25 international experts
and Cambodian counterparts, completed the draft plan in
September which was being reviewed by the new government.
A review of ZEMP was held in Phnom Penh at the end of
November and attended by the project team, Ministers and
donors.
Mr Bouchenaki also informed the Committee of the recent
establishment of an Intergovernmental Committee for the
safeguarding and development of Angkor as decided by the
Tokyo Conference (12 and 13 October 1993). The primary
purpose of this Phnom Penh-based Intergovernmental
Committee, whose secretariat would be provided by UNESCO,
is to assist the Cambodian Government in defining
conservation priorities and to promote and coordinate
international assistance for Angkor. The World Heritage
Committee supported the appeal of the Director-General of
UNESCO to the international community to re-dynamise
cooperation with the Kingdom of Cambodia for safeguarding
Angkor.
In addition to the information provided by the Secretariat,
Mr Beschaouch was requested to present the outcome of his
mission to Cambodia, as special representative of the
Director-General. He informed the Committee about his
contacts with the highest authorities in Cambodia and
confirmed their willingness to pursue and reinforce the
cooperation with UNESCO for the safeguarding of the sites
of Angkor. Following this presentation, the Committee
expressed its satisfaction with the progress made in the
political normalization and national reconciliation
*[32]
process, following the promulgation of the Constitution of
the Kingdom of Cambodia. Furthermore, the Committee
applauded the activities carried out by UNESCO in
cooperation with the Cambodian authorities to establish a
legal, procedural, technical and administrative framework
for the integrated safeguarding of the site of Angkor and
its ensemble. The Committee noted also with satisfaction
the new perspectives resulting from the intergovernmental
Tokyo Conference to mobilize international assistance for
the safeguarding of Angkor.
Following these reports, the Committee recommended:
1. that the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia
finalizes, with UNESCO's assistance, the elaboration of an
emergency safeguarding scheme in the framework of a
regional management and development plan. This plan should
include cultural and ecological dimensions of the
historical perimeter as well as adequate conservation
measures;
2. that UNESCO, which ensures the Secretariat of the
"International Coordination Committee", envisages sending
to the World Heritage Committee a periodic report on the
development of international action for Angkor;
3. that ICOMOS and ICCROM may assist the Cambodian
authorities in the elaboration of a long-term management
and monitoring programme in Angkor, including the specific
training of various indispensable personnel.
The Old City of Dubrovnik (Croatia)
The Secretariat recalled action undertaken by UNESCO in
cooperation with Croatian specialists, and indicated that
the brochures prepared jointly with national authorities
proved to be an excellent promotional support. A number of
safeguarding measures were taken:
- a restoration methodology was defined;
- training courses were organized in France and Italy
for Croatian architects;
- equipment and materials were purchased for the
restoration of roofs.
These UNESCO activities, undertaken in liaison with the
Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments of
Dubrovnik, the Institute for the Rehabilitation of
Dubrovnik and the UNESCO National Commission, should be
reinforced through support under the World Heritage Fund.
At the request of the Committee at its sixteenth session,
the Croatian authorities submitted a proposal for the
extension of the World Heritage site. This was discussed
by the Bureau at its seventeenth extraordinary session, and
it was decided to defer this proposal until the Croatian
*[33]
authorities also submit, as requested, a proposal for a
buffer zone.
Saint Sophia, (Turkey)
During the official visit of the Director-General of UNESCO
to Turkey in April 1993, the Turkish authorities drew his
attention to the deteriorating state of conservation of
Saint Sophia. Subsequently, a mission financed by UNESCO
took place to assess the state of conservation of Saint
Sophia and concluded that the building was not seriously at
risk. However, it was proposed to set up a system of
control, especially with regard to all movement which could
affect the structure of the building. The evaluation
report of the mission would be made available to the
Bureau.
The Hermitage, St. Petersburg (Russian Federation)
At the request of the authorities of the Russian
Federation, the Director-General decided to launch a large-
scale project for the rehabilitation of the Hermitage
Museum. Two missions were organized in 1993 in which
experts of the Kimbell Art Museum of Houston, and the
Metropolitan Museum, New York, (USA) participated.
Furthermore, UNESCO requested a consultant engineering firm
in Edinburgh, (UK), to identify different components for a
rehabilitation programme for the Hermitage Museum. This
group of architects/engineers visited the site in September
and November 1993 to prepare, together with Russian
specialists, the rehabilitation programme for the buildings
of the complex. A progress report would be submitted for
information to the Bureau.
Old Walled City of Shibam (Yemen)
Referring to the torrential rains in spring 1993 which
affected a number of houses of the Old City of Shibam, the
Director of the Division of Cultural and Physical Heritage
and the Delegate of Germany presented the slides made by
a German film producer who had visited the site.
Emphasizing the different threats being faced by Shibam,
they both drew the attention of Committee members to the
importance of emergency assistance to repair the sewerage
network, the modernisation of traditional irrigation
systems and maintenance work to make the terrasses of the
'tower-houses', which characterize this City, waterproof.
X.8 The Representative of ICOMOS introduced the
applied modus operandi for reporting and monitoring and
presented the state of conservation report on the following
sites:
*[34]
Kizhi Pogost, Russian Federation
At the seventeenth session of the Bureau, ICOMOS informed
about its involvement in the conservation efforts for Kizhi
Pogost and that an expert mission would be undertaken to
the site. The Bureau approved a technical assistance
request to support this mission with funds provided under
the Canadian Green Plan. The mission took place in summer
1993 and a full report was available. In collaboration with
the Russian counterparts, the mission addressed issues such
as legal protection, conservation management, fire
protection, iconostasis conservation, documentation, and
monitoring, history and authenticity, biological/chemical
deterioration, structure and conservation philosophy and
goals.
Based on the findings of the mission, ICOMOS recommended
that in 1994 high priority be given to finding means to
support the following study and decision-making activities:
- monitoring and documentation
- completion of all required preliminary studies and
reaching consensus on the conservation concept
- completion of individual conservation studies and
their consolidation within a comprehensive and
integrated conservation plan.
A major conservation project at the site could then start
in 1995.
The Committee commended ICOMOS for its excellent
collaboration with the Russian authorities and experts and
the collaboration provided by the Governments of Canada,
Finland and Norway and the individual ICOMOS members who
participated in the mission. The Committee endorsed the
recommendations formulated by ICOMOS.
St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
ICOMOS reported to the Bureau at its seventeenth session on
its review of factors related to the steady deterioration
of the physical environment of the city. The Bureau
supported the ICOMOS recommendation to explore ways and
means to encourage exchange between the city's specialists
and outside experts. An ICOMOS mission undertaken in June
1993 identified the following key problems: insufficient
public resources, changing function of the city, housing
and ecological problems, unplanned urban development, lack
of appropriate management and heritage legislation, lack of
adequate documentation and lack of public involvement.
These problems, however, were very well understood by local
authorities and experts. ICOMOS proposed to organize an
evaluation workshop in St. Petersburg in June 1994 with the
participation of about 25 Russian professionals or
*[35]
municipal planners and ten outside professionals from
Central and Western Europe. ICOMOS had included funding
support for this meeting in its budget for 1994. In
response to a question from the Delegate of Thailand, the
ICOMOS Representative underlined that the situation in St.
Petersburg is critical, but that improvement could be
expected. The Committee endorsed this proposal for an
expert meeting.
Santiago de Compostela, Spain
At its seventeenth session, the Bureau discussed the
problems posed by the construction of a sports hall in the
World Heritage site. Severe concerns were transmitted to
the Spanish authorities. Recently, an agreement has been
reached between the municipal, regional and national
authorities. ICOMOS evaluated the revised project and found
it to be in harmony with its historic environment.
The Committee expressed its satisfaction to the Spanish
authorities for the action taken to maintain the integrity
of the site.
Kathmandu Valley, Nepal
A joint UNESCO/ICOMOS mission was undertaken in November
1993 to evaluate current and past conservation activities
to examine boundaries and to study the possibility of
setting-up buffer zones, to verify the state of the listed
the monuments, to assess the support capacities of the
national and municipal authorities and to evaluate proposed
amendments to the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act. The
mission's conclusions stressed the continuing urgency of
the situation and defined sixteen areas in which
significant improvements should be made in order to
maintain the integrity of the original inscription. The
mission also suggested increased international support and
a permanent UNESCO presence at the site. ICOMOS suggested
that the Government of Nepal consider recommending to the
Committee to place the Kathmandu Valley on the List of
World Heritage in Danger, in order to increase
international support, and that a follow-up mission be
undertaken in a year's time in order to assess, in
cooperation of the Nepalese authorities, the progress made
in the sixteen areas of concern.
The Observer from Nepal stated that his Government would
seriously consider the recommendations made by the mission.
In his opinion, threats to the site were not so severe that
listing on the World Heritage in Danger List would be
appropriate. Nepal was actively taking measures, notably
for improved conservation, management and legal protection
of the site, among others, and the state of conservation
would improve in the near future. Nepal would appreciate
*[36]
receiving technical assistance from the Fund and ICOMOS to
support its conservation efforts.
The Committee concluded that the mission report should be
studied in-depth and that the recommendations should be
reviewed with the Nepalese authorities. The Committee
requested the Centre to report on this matter to the Bureau
at its next session.
X.9 The ICOMOS Representative informed the Committee
also of the involvement of ICOMOS in site specific or
national monitoring efforts. Special mention was made of
the monitoring of World Heritage sites in the United
Kingdom that was commissioned by the authorities of UK-
ICOMOS, and of joint monitoring missions to two sites in
Norway undertaken by national experts, ICOM and ICCROM.
X.10 The Committee expressed its appreciation for the
positive actions taken by the States Parties in response to
inquiries by the Secretariat and to recommendations and
observations made by the Bureau and Committee.
XI. NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE
WORLD HERITAGE LIST AND LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN
DANGER
XI.1 The Committee took note of the advice of the
authorities of Australia that the matters raised by the
Bureau at its seventeenth session regarding nomination
368bis of the extension of the Central Eastern Rainforests
of Australia were in the process of being resolved, and
that further advice would be provided to the Bureau at its
next meeting.
A. Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List
Name of Identifi- State Party having Criteria
Property cation No. submitted the
nomination in accord-
ance with the
Convention
Joya de Ceren 675 El Salvador C(iii)(iv)
Ceren
Archaeological
Site
The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (iii) and
(iv), but noted the fragility of the remains and
recommended that particular attention should be given to
its conservation.
*[37]
Bamberg 624 Germany C(ii)(iv)
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Maulbronn 546rev Germany C(ii)(iv)
Monastery
Complex
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Humayun's 232 India C(ii)(iv)
Tomb, Delhi
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Qutb Minar 233 India C(iv)
and its monu-
ments, Delhi
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv).
Archaeological 659 Ireland C(i)(iii)(iv)
ensemble of
the Bend in
the Boyne
The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (i), (iii)
and (iv) and invited the Irish authorities to control
carefully future developments in and around the site and to
involve ICOMOS in conservation and management planning.
I Sassi di 670 Italy C(iii)(iv)(v)
Matera
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iii), (iv) and (v).
Himeji-jo 661 Japan C(i)(iv)
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (i) and (iv).
*[38]
Buddhist 660 Japan C(i)(ii)(iv)(vi)
Monuments
in the Horyu-
ji area
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (i), (ii), (iv) and (vi).
Yakushima 662 Japan N(ii)(iii)
The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (ii) and
(iii) noting in particular the sacred values of the ancient
forests of Yakusugi and took note of the statement by the
Japanese authorities that a coordinating committee for the
site had been established. The Committee endorsed the
suggestion in the IUCN report concerning follow-up
measures.
Shirakami- 663 Japan N(ii)
Sanchi
The Committee inscribed the site of the undisturbed
pristine beech forest under criterion (ii) taking note that
the Japanese authorities incorporated the original buffer
zone in the site and a new map illustrating the revised
boundaries. Progress on strengthening the legal basis and
preparation of a management plan was also noted. The
Committee noted the desirability of a follow-up mission to
review progress in about three years.
The Delegate of Japan thanked the Committee for its
deliberations and confirmed that the Japanese authorities
will do their utmost to ensure the protection of World
Heritage sites.
Whale 554bis Mexico N(iv)
Sanctuary
of El Vizcaino
The Committee recognized the exceptional universal value of
the site as a sanctuary for grey whales and other important
species and inscribed it on the World Heritage List under
criterion (iv). The Committee noted that there is a need
for significant improvement in the infrastructure required
to manage the site as well as the need to enhance
educational and promotional activities outlined in more
detail in the IUCN Technical Evaluation.
*[39]
Historic 676 Mexico C(ii)(iv)
Centre of
Zacatecas
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Rock Paintings 714 Mexico C(i)(iii)
of the Sierra
de San Francisco
Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the original
nomination of the mixed site of El Vizcaino was resubmitted
as separate cultural and natural nominations. The Committee
inscribed the cultural site of the Rock Paintings of the
Sierra de San Francisco under criteria (i) and (iii).
Tongariro 421rev New Zealand C(vi)
National Park N(ii)(iii)
The Committee recalled that this site was originally
submitted as a mixed site. However, it was inscribed in
1990 under natural criteria (ii) and (iii) only. At the
same time as the Committee revised the criteria for
cultural heritage, it requested the New Zealand authorities
to resubmit the nomination as a mixed site. The
seventeenth extraordinary session of the Bureau reviewed
the revised nomination and referred it to the Committee.
ICOMOS informed the Committee of a mission to the site in
late November 1993. The Committee discussed the matter in
detail both from a procedural point of view as well as in
regard to the application of criterion (vi). The Committee
decided that the stipulation in the Operational Guidelines
that criterion (vi) be only applied "in exceptional
circumstances or in conjunction with other criteria" refers
to either natural or cultural criteria. After careful
consideration, the Committee decided to inscribe Tongariro
National Park also under cultural criterion (vi).
Jesuit Missions 648 Paraguay C(iv)
of La Santísima
Trinidad de
Paraná and
Jesús de Tavarangue
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv). The Committee invited Brazil,
Argentina and Paraguay to consider a joint inscription of
the Jesuit missions on their territories. The Delegate of
Brazil would welcome a joint conservation effort and
announced that such an initiative was being taken in the
context of MERCOSUR.
*[40]
Baroque 677 Philippines C(ii)(iv)
Churches of the
Philippines
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
Tubbataha 653 Philippines N(ii)(iii)
Reef (iv)
Marine Park
The Committee inscribed Tubbataha Reef Marine Park under
criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv) as one of the outstanding
coral reefs in the region and encouraged the Philippine
authorities to provide funds for the management of the
site. The Delegate of the Philippines stated that they
would do their utmost to ensure funding for the management
of the site.
Biertan and 596 Romania C(iv)
its fortified
Church
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv). However, the Committee strongly
recommended that the surrounding landscape should be
adequately protected and invited the State Party to
consider the extension of the buffer zone.
Monastery of 597 Romania C(ii)
Horezu
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (ii).
Churches of 598 Romania C(i)(iv)
Moldavia
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (i) and (iv), noting in particular the
exceptional value of the external mural paintings.
Architectural 657 Russian C(ii)(iv)
ensemble of the Federation
Trinity Sergius
Lavra in
Sergiev Posad
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii) and (iv).
*[41]
Vlkolínec 522rev *[sic; should be 622rev]
Slovak Republic C(iv)(v)
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iv) and (v). The Committee commended ICOMOS
on the comparative study on "Traditional Villages in the
Carpathian Basin and its immediate surroundings" which has
been carried out in consultation with specialists from all
the countries concerned.
Spissky Hrad 620rev Slovak Republic C(iv)
and its
associated cultural
monuments
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv).
Banská 618rev Slovak Republic C(iv)(v)
Stiavnica
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iv) and (v).
Archaeological 664 Spain C(iii)(iv)
ensemble of
Merida
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iii) and (iv).
Royal Monas- 665 Spain C(iv)(vi)
tery of Santa
María de
Guadalupe
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iv) and (vi).
The Route of 669 Spain C(ii)(iv)(vi)
Santiago
de Compostela
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). In response to a
suggestion made by the Bureau, the Delegate of Spain
informed the Committee that Spain would like to maintain
the already inscribed sites of Santiago de Compostela and
Burgos Cathedral as separate properties on the World
Heritage List in view of their individual and particular
uniqueness.
*[42]
The Delegate of France informed the Committee that
discussions were in progress between Spain and France on a
joint inscription of the Route of Santiago on both
territories. He welcomed the inscription of the Spanish
part and announced that the complementary part in France
would be nominated in due course. In this context, the
Delegate from the United States stressed the importance of
considering historic transportation corridors for inclusion
in the World Heritage.
Birka and 555 Sweden C(iii)(iv)
Hovgården
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iii) and (iv).
Engelsberg 556rev Sweden C(iv)
Ironworks
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv).
Coro and its 658 Venezuela C(iv)(v)
Port
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (iv) and (v). The Delegate of Germany
pointed out that a comparative study on colonial towns in
Latin America would be appropriate to obtain a better
insight in this matter.
The Complex of 678 Vietnam C(iv)
Hué Monuments
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criterion (iv), but decided that the inscription
would only take effect upon receipt of a Tentative List for
Vietnam. By letter of 9 December the Vietnamese authorities
provided the requested Tentative List, thus this property
was inscribed on the World Heritage List.
Historic 611 Yemen C(ii)(iv)(vi)
Town of Zabid
The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List
under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). The Committee
recommended the authorities to strengthen the conservation
and management of the site in consultation with ICOMOS.
*[43]
XI.2 With reference to the nomination of The Historic
Centre of Boukhara, (Uzbekistan) (602rev), the Committee
noted that this property was presented by the former USSR
and that it was included in its Tentative List. This
Tentative List had not been reconfirmed by the Uzbekistan
authorities with regard to cultural properties on its
territory. Therefore, the Committee decided that
inscription under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi) would only
take effect if and when the Tentative List is presented.
B. Properties which the Committee did not inscribe on the
World Heritage List
Fossil 667 Hungary
Findings of
Ipolytarnoc
The Committee recognized the importance of this site on a
national level, however it did not meet criteria for
inscription on the World Heritage List.
Wild Ass 650 India
Sanctuary
The Committee was of the view that this site, although
important at a national level, did not meet criteria for
inclusion on the World Heritage List.
Cedars of 646 Lebanon
Lebanon
The Committee recognized the sacred importance of the
Cedars of Lebanon. However, the nominated site is too small
to retain its integrity and therefore the Committee was of
the view that it did not meet natural World Heritage
criteria. The Delegate of Lebanon informed the Committee
that steps were being undertaken for the preparation for a
future nomination of a cultural landscape being considered
for the Qadisha Valley, including one Grove of the Lebanese
Cedars.
Cuc-Phong 673 Vietnam
National Park
The Committee recognized the importance of the site as the
first National Park in Vietnam. The site, however, does
not meet the criteria of outstanding universal value under
either natural or cultural criteria, and therefore was not
recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List.
During IUCN's field review of this site it was noted that
other forest sites may fulfil the criteria and should be
reviewed.
*[44]
C. Property inscribed on the List of World Heritage in
Danger
Everglades National Park, United States of America
The Committee's considerations and recommendations
regarding the state of conservation of this site are
described in Chapter X.2 of this report.
TENTATIVE LISTS
XI.3 After having reviewed the nominations for
inscription on the World Heritage List, the Committee
reviewed Section I of the Document WHC-93/CONF.002/7.
XI.4 The Committee took note of the considerations
presented by the Secretariat on this issue and of the
results of an analysis of the tentative lists that have
been submitted by States Parties over the years. The
Committee expressed its concern on the small number of
tentative lists that meet the requirements as stipulated in
the Operational Guidelines, paragraphs 7 and 8, and
confirmed the importance of these lists for planning
purposes, comparative analysis of nominations and for
facilitating the undertaking of the global and thematic
studies.
XI.5 The Committee also confirmed that the tentative
lists, which are mandatory for cultural properties and
voluntary for natural ones, include those properties which
the State Party intends to nominate for inscription on the
World Heritage List during the coming five to ten years,
and that these lists can be amended whenever the State
Party concerned considers it opportune. The Committee will
consider the necessity of a substantive evaluation of the
tentative lists once a sufficient number has been received.
XI.6 The Committee invited the States Parties which
have not yet done so, to pursue the preparation of
tentative lists according the the Operational Guidelines.
The Committee took the following decisions and requested
the Centre to ensure their implementation:
- During the next two-year period the highest priority
should be given to the establishment and/or revision
of tentative lists in accordance with the stipulations
in the Operational Guidelines, paragraphs 7 and 8.
Active collaboration with the States Parties should be
sought and preparatory assistance be provided when
necessary and requested by the State Party concerned.
- During this period nominations of cultural properties
that are included in any of the tentative lists would
be accepted and processed according to the Operational
Guidelines.
*[45]
- As of 1 October 1995 only nominations of cultural
properties that are included in tentative lists which
meet all requirements as stipulated in the Operational
Guidelines would be processed.
- From 1994 onwards, the tentative lists that meet the
requirements as stipulated in the Operational
Guidelines would be published and presented as an
information document to the Committee at its annual
meetings.
XII. SITUATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND, BUDGET FOR
1994 AND DRAFT BUDGET FOR 1995
XII.1 The Committee adopted the following budget for
1994 and took note of the indicative budget for 1995.
Approved budget for 1994 and indicative budget for 1995
1994 1995
Items Approved Indicative
US$ US$
___________________________________________________________
1. Preparatory assistance 150,000 150,000
2. Global and Regional thematic
studies - meetings 40,000 40,000
__________________________
3. Monitoring
a) Methodology meetings 65,000
World Heritage Cities 15,000
b) Implementation of
programmes:
Latin America & the Caribbean 65,000
Africa 55,000
Asia and Pacific 55,000
Arab Region and Europe 40,000
c) ICOMOS 40,000
d) IUCN 45,000
e) WCMC 20,000
_______________________________
Total Monitoring 400,000 420,000
(Note 1)
*[46]
4. Technical cooperation 790,000 850,000
5. Training
a) ICCROM 90,000
b) IUCN 10,000
c) Other (Note 2) 340,000
___________________________
Total Training 440,000 440,000
___________________________
6. Promotion and Education 270,000 320,000
7. Attendance of experts
(LDC & DC) to statutory
World Heritage meetings 40,000 40,000
____________________________
9. Assistance to the Centre 280,000 280,000
10. Advisory services
a) ICOMOS 310,000
b) IUCN 190,000
___________________________
Total Advisory Services 500,000 500,000
TOTAL BUDGET 2,910,000 3,040,000
_____________________________
XII.2 The Committee also established an Emergency
Reserve. In accordance with Financial Regulation, Article
5.1, an amount of US$1 million shall be transferred from
the undisposed balance of the Fund to a Reserve Fund to
meet requests for assistance resulting from disasters or
natural calamities. Expenditure from the Reserve Fund
should be made in accordance with the Operational
Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage
Convention.
Approved Emergency Reserve for 1994 and Indicative Reserve
for 1995
1994 1995
US$ US$
1,000,000
*[47]
XII.3 After approval of the budget for 1994, the
Committee adopted the two following recommendations and
decisions for the execution of the budget:
1. The Monitoring budget, which provides for both on-site
monitoring and coordinating workshops of site
managers, will respect an appropriate flexible ratio
in the allocation of resources between natural and
cultural programmes.
2. Included in the budget for "Other" amounting to
US$340,000, is support for training schools and
seminars (e.g. Mweka, Tanzania) in developing
countries and for individuals from developing
countries to attend training schools and seminars.
XII.4 The Committee also decided that:
- A balance sheet should be presented by the Director of
the Centre at the end of each year.
- An amount of US$2 million of the undisposed balance of
the Fund should be blocked as a Contingency Reserve.
- The Chairperson was authorized to commit up to 20% of
the 1995 indicative budget in 1994 for 1995
expenditure if it was considered necessary for the
smooth implementation of the programme, on condition
that such commitments are within the limits of funds
available and that expenditure was made in accordance
with the Operational Guidelines for the implementation
of the World Heritage Convention.
XIII. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
XIII.1 The Committee examined document WHC-
93/CONF.002/10Rev. of 5 December 1993 and the Rapporteur of
the outgoing Bureau reported on the requests for
international assistance approved by the Bureau as well as
on the following recommendations to the Committee:
A. Technical Assistance
Natural Heritage
Sangay National Park, Ecuador
The Committee recalled that Sangay National Park was on the
List of World Heritage in Danger. As requested, IUCN
presented a monitoring report on the site. The Committee
approved a request for US$ 28,500 for communications
equipment, solar panels and donkeys and in addition, some
graphic materials for interpretation and public
communication.
*[48]
Mount Nimba, Guinea
The Committee recalled that Mount Nimba in Guinea was
included on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The
Bureau had recommended US$ 30,000 for technical assistance,
however, in view of the need for on-site management, the
Committee recommended that the full request for US$ 45,000
be approved. The funds should be used to provide for
consulting services, operational equipment and on-site
protection. In addition, a consultant should assist in the
implementation of the new administrative centre for which
legislation was being prepared. Furthermore, a consultant
would organize a donors' meeting aimed at strengthening the
management and protection of the site in association with
the Biosphere Reserve Programme.
Komodo National Park, Indonesia
The Bureau recommended to the Committee to approve a sum of
US$ 37,000, however after consultation with IUCN which had
received new information, the Committee agreed to approve
the full request of US $49,500, pending clarification of
the training component of the project which involved
US$12,500.
The technical assistance request included equipment
purchases, staff training, socio-economic studies as well
as the construction of wells.
Cultural Heritage
Serra da Capivara National Park, Brazil
The Committee reviewed a request for technical assistance
for the Serra da Capivara National Park in Brazil, which
consisted of two components: a request for US$ 25,000 for
measures to protect some of the most visited rock painting
sites and to facilitate visitation to these sites, and a
request for US$ 28,000 for the purchase of equipment for
the inventory and documentation of the rock paintings.
The Committee, upon the recommendation of the Bureau,
approved an amount of US$ 15,000 under preparatory
assistance as it was of the opinion that international
expertise should be made available to the site managers
with the objective to study the most appropriate protective
measures for the rock paintings.
The Committee approved also the request for technical
assistance for the amount of US$ 28,000 for the purchase
of the necessary equipment for inventory and documentation
activities.
*[49]
Old Havana and its fortifications, Cuba
Having taken note of the monitoring report that was
presented at its session, the Committee approved a request
for technical assistance for the amount of US$ 55,000 for
Old Havana. Following the recommendation of the monitoring
mission, the Committee decided that these funds should be
used exclusively for consolidation and restoration works in
buildings that will be used for housing purposes.
Cliffs of Bandiagara - Land of the Dogons, Mali
As recommended by the Bureau, the Committee approved a
request for technical assistance for the amount of
US$42,000 for a pilot inventory project in three of the 300
villages in the site, each one representative of the three
human settlement zones that characterize the site (the
plateau, the eroded cliffs and the plain). The funds would
be used for equipment (US$ 8,000), research (US$ 2,000),
international and national expert services (US$ 29,000) and
training activities (US$ 3,000).
International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and
the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM).
The Committee approved a request for the amount of
US$ 25,000 for ICCROM's Technical Assistance programme
which provides assistance in the form of material, small
equipment, publications and expert services to States
Parties.
B. Training
Natural Heritage
School for the Training of Wildlife Specialists,
Garoua/Cameroon
The Committee reviewed a request for US$ 43,667 for a
training seminar to be held in Cameroon in 1994. The
Committee approved a sum of US$ 35,000 pending receipt by
the Centre of more detailed information and a justification
of the estimated costs.
Training Course - ENGREF (France)
The Committee reviewed a request for US$ 40,000 and after
considerable discussion approved a sum of US$ 30,000 for a
training course by ENGREF to be held in the Tai National
Park and World Heritage site. The course was endorsed by
the State Party (France). The funds are to be dispersed to
facilitate the holding of the course in the World Heritage
site as well as for travel and fellowships for participants
from developing countries, in particular francophone
Africa.
*[50]
The Centre was requested to contact the course director and
to continue discussions vis-à-vis the orientation of the
course in relation to the World Heritage Convention and to
seek possible linkages with this course and the training
school in Garoua. The Committee also requested a
comprehensive report from ENGREF on the outcome of the
course and the content related to protection and management
of World Heritage sites.
Cultural Heritage
Regional training course of Maghreb architects for the
conservation and protection of cultural monuments and sites
(1994-1995), Tunisia
The Committee approved a request of US$ 50,000 for a
regional training course for architects from countries in
the Maghreb that will be held in Tunisia in 1994-1995. The
course will be implemented by the National Heritage
Institute of Tunisia in collaboration with ICCROM and
ICOMOS and will train approximately twenty graduates in
conservation and management of cultural heritage.
International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and
the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM).
The Committee approved a request for the amount of
US$ 75,000 for fellowships for participants from States
Parties (developing countries) for three regular ICCROM
courses: architectural conservation, conservation of mural
paintings and scientific principles of conservation.
C. Emergency assistance
Cultural Heritage
Old Walled City of Shibam, Yemen
Having taken note of the state of conservation report
presented by the Secretariat which clearly illustrated the
emergency situation in Shibam, the Committee approved the
request for emergency assistance for the amount of US$
40,500 for emergency measures regarding the drainage system
in Shibam (US$ 30,500) and expert services in this field
(US$ 10,000). The Committee asked the Centre to inform the
Yemeni authorities that they could submit an additional
emergency request for consideration by the Bureau at its
next session and to transmit its concern that maintenance
programmes should be set up so as to avoid further damage
to the site in the future.
XIII.2 After having reviewed the requests for
technical cooperation, several delegates recalled that the
Committee, during its sixteenth session, signaled the need
for a systematic evaluation of World Heritage activities.
*[51]
In this context the Delegate of Germany proposed that
biennial reports be prepared by the Centre and presented to
the Committee on the implementation of international
assistance provided by the World Heritage Fund. The
Delegate pointed out that this information was crucial for
the evaluation of successive requests for the same site or
project, also in view of the fact that World Heritage
funding was increasingly only part of more complex funding
mechanisms. The Delegate of Germany proposed that the first
report would cover the period 1990-1994 and be presented,
after discussion in the Bureau, to the Committee at its
next session.
XIII.3 The Director of the Centre proposed to give a
first overview of the available reports on international
assistance provided by the States Parties at the next
Bureau meeting and to decide on the procedure of reporting
on the basis of this overview. The Committee adopted this
amendment.
XIV. REVISION OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES CONCERNING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION
XIV.1 The former Rapporteur of the Committee introduced
the working document WHC-93/CONF.002/11 consisting of a
revised text of the Operational Guidelines concerning the
implementation of the World Heritage Convention. This text
took into consideration the request of the Committee,
expressed at its session in Santa Fe in 1992, that the
Strategic Orientations be incorporated in the Guidelines,
together with the proposals made by two States Parties,
Italy and the United States of America. He explained that
the Bureau, at its seventeenth session (Paris, June 1993)
examined the proposed modifications which had been
submitted and which concerned paragraphs: 3, 6, 39, 40, 41,
43, 53, 55, 58, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 78, 79, 83, 88, 89,
94, 103, 112, 113, 114, 117 and 118. The Bureau recommended
adoption of this text by the Committee.
XIV.2 After discussion, the Committee adopted the
Operational Guidelines as amended by the Bureau with the
following additional changes:
Paragraph 14, the following sentence should be added at the
end of the paragraph: "Participation of local people in the
nomination process is essential to establish, as much as
possible, the shared responsibilities between them and the
State Party regarding site maintenance, but should not
prejudice future decision-making by the Committee".
Paragraph 55: The timetable for the processing of
nominations will remain the same in 1994 as in previous
years and should be examined in detail at the next session
of the Committee.
*[52]
Paragraph 75: Requests for emergency assistance may be
sent to the World Heritage Centre at any time using Form
WHC/5. The World Heritage Centre should consult to the
extent possible relevant advisory bodies and then submit
these requests to the Chairperson who has the authorization
to approve emergency requests up to an amount of US$50,000
whereas the Bureau can approve requests up to an amount of
US$75,000.
Paragraph 83: The Delegate of Colombia proposed that point
5 of para. 83 of the revised Operational Guidelines should
take into account the costs of monitoring for the States
Parties particularly the developing countries. She
suggested deleting the last sentence of this paragraph
which reads: "This analysis will be taken into account for
the evaluation of the request", pointing out that the
provision of the state of conservation report should be
optional rather than an obligatory requirement. This
proposal was adopted by concensus.
Paragraph 89: The last paragraph should read as follows:
"However no more than 20% of the total annual assistance
budget including technical cooperation and training (but
excluding emergency assistance and preparatory assistance,
for which separate rules have been established) may be
allocated by the Chairperson."
Paragraph 118: "The World Heritage Committee has
recognized the collective interest that would be advanced
by closer coordination of its work with other international
conservation instruments. These include the 1949 Geneva
Conventions, the 1954 The Hague Convention, the 1970
UNESCO Convention, the Ramsar Convention, and CITES, as
well as other regional conventions and future conventions
that will pursue conservation objectives, as appropriate.
The Committee will invite representatives of the
intergovernmental bodies under related conventions to
attend its meetings as observers. Similarly, the
Secretariat will appoint a representative to observe
meetings of the other inter-governmental bodies upon
receipt of an invitation. The Secretariat will ensure
through the World Heritage Centre appropriate coordination
and information-sharing between the Committee and other
conventions, programmes and international organizations
related to the conservation of cultural and natural
heritage."
XIV.3 The Committee decided that a section on
monitoring should be included in the Operational Guidelines
and asked the World Heritage Centre to undertake in 1994
the necessary work in cooperation with the advisory bodies.
XIV.4 The text of the revised Operational Guidelines as
adopted by the Committee should be prepared and distributed
by the World Heritage Centre to all States Parties early in
1994 in English and French.
*[53]
XV. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES
XV.1 Introducing the working document on promotional
activities (WHC-93/CONF-002/6) the Secretariat pointed out
that it consisted of two parts: Part I being the report on
activities carried out in 1993, and Part II outlining
proposals for 1994 and 1995. The first part, written in the
established tradition, reports only on the activities
undertaken by the World Heritage Centre, without including
activities meant to promote the Convention and which may
have been carried out by other units of UNESCO, the States
Parties themselves or the advisory bodies. Assuming that
the report had been read, the presentation highlighted only
some of the actions, notably:
the success of The World Heritage Newsletter, the ongoing
Independent Image production of eight 52-minute TV series
on World Heritage sites, the two new postal stamps issued
by the French PTT (Angkor and Tassili N'Ajjer) and the
recent production of four CD-photos within the project
"Patrimony 2001" depicting Angkor, Lalibela, Saint-
Petersbourg and the Viking culture.
XV.2 Speaking of the plans for 1994-1995, it was
underlined that a new strategy was being developed, based
on greater concertation and cooperation with the Centre's
partners both within and outside of UNESCO. The aim of this
would be to use more fully existing networks, thereby
increasing the multiplier effect of all the partners
concerned. A meeting to that effect would be organized by
the Centre at the beginning of 1994.
XV.3 Explaining further the proposed plan, the
Secretariat outlined the following priority areas for
action:
(i) establishing a reliable data-base with easily
retrievable information on the World Heritage
sites and the institutional memory of the
Convention;
(ii) developing a top-quality photo library, in
cooperation with the project "Patrimony 2001",
indispensable for good exhibits and for the
production of educational and general information
material;
(iii) using optimally the World Heritage sites for
promotional activities, especially in the World
Heritage cities where museums and other similar
institutions offer an as yet relatively little
used potential;
(iv) exchange among States Parties of mobile modular
photo exhibits;
*[54]
(v) gradually integrating knowledge on World Heritage
into school curricula and extracurricula
activities;
(vi) production of high-quality information kits for
the media in general.
In this context, she informed the Committee that the
project "Patrimony 2001" had foreseen for 1994 twenty
missions covering twenty-nine sites, of which twenty-one
were World Heritage properties (3 in Latin America, 8 in
Europe, 6 in Asia, 5 in the Arab States and 2 in Africa).
XV.4 In conclusion, she also informed the Committee of the
Centre's wish to organize, in cooperation with partners
within and outside of UNESCO, a Young People's World
Heritage Forum, to be held in Bergen, Norway, in summer
1995, within the framework of the second General Assembly
of the World Heritage Cities Organization and to mark the
Fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations and of UNESCO.
The immediate goals of such an event would be to (i)
mobilize worldwide attention to the need of developing
educational programmes on World Heritage, and (ii) to begin
preparing in each of the regions appropriate pedagogic
material.
XV.5 In the debate that followed, the Delegate of
Lebanon underlined the importance of strengthening
promotional activities on the sites themselves. He urged
the Centre and others concerned to produce simple, easily
accessible information material such as the World Heritage
poster currently in use. The Delegate of Germany agreed
with this but at the same time drew attention to
translation costs of such material which needs to be
produced in the languages of the States Parties if it is to
be effective. The Delegate of China seized this
opportunity to inform the Committee of the promotional
activities undertaken in 1993 in his country. While the
Delegate of Peru suggested that future reports of the
Secretariat on promotional activities should also include
information on such activities carried out in the States
Parties.
XV.6 Pointing out that the Committee had just approved
a considerable budget for promotional activities in 1994
and 1995, the Observer of Australia regretted that the
Report for 1993 on Promotional Activities does not include
an evaluation of the work. Furthemore, he warned against
an overly-ambitious programme in the future, emphasizing
that promotional work is foremost a matter of national
concern.
XV.7 The Representative of ICOMOS welcomed the
proposed promotional and educational plan for 1994-1995,
which largely coincides with his Organization's plans. He
*[55]
continued by pointing out the importance of coordinating
UNESCO's actions with those of the advisory bodies, so as
to make the best use of the existing potential and to avoid
spreading possibly conflicting messages. He underlined
also ICOMOS' focus on children and young people, and in
this sense looked forward to cooperating with UNESCO.
Referring to the comments made by the Observer of
Australia, he explained that while the national dimension
of promotional and educational work is of primary
importance, it cannot be disassociated from international
cooperation in matters concerning World Heritage as this,
by definition, speaks of the universal. He also referred
to ICOMOS' work with the Council of Europe, the aim of
which was to sensitize tour operators to World Heritage
matters.
XV.8 The Observer ICOM-Colombia drew the Committee's
attention to museums as a particularly useful network for
spreading knowledge on World Heritage to the public in
general and especially among the young.
XVI. EXAMINATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE REVISED
CULTURAL CRITERIA OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES
FOR THE INCLUSION OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPES ON THE
WORLD HERITAGE LIST
XVI.1 The Committee reviewed document WHC-93/CONF.002/9
and information document WHC-93/CONF.002/INF.4. The
Committee recalled the decisions taken at its sixteenth
session in Santa Fe, New Mexico, in 1992 to include
cultural landscapes on the World Heritage List, in
particular the revision of the cultural criteria of the
Operational Guidelines. The Committee took note of the
outcome of the expert meeting held in October 1993 in
Templin, Germany, at the request of the Committee. The
Committee appreciated the organization of the meeting by
the World Heritage Centre, assisted by the German
Delegation and funded by the Deutsche Bundesstiftung
Umwelt, recognized the work carried out, and noted that the
revised cultural criteria and the interpretative paragraphs
concerning cultural landscapes in the Operational
Guidelines were confirmed by the experts. It furthermore
noted, that additional information, guidance and advice be
provided to States Parties on the subject of cultural
landscapes.
XVI.2 The Committee recalled that a specific
recommendation by the experts concerning Paragraph 14 of
the Operational Guidelines regarding the involvement of
people in the nomination procedure was taken into account
during the discussion on the revision of the Operational
Guidelines (see Chapter XIV of this Report).
XVI.3 Several delegates stressed the necessity of an
increased involvement of regional experts. The Secretariat
*[56]
confirmed that the publication of the report of the expert
meeting will also include contributions from regions that
were not represented at the meeting, and that in the
implementation of the Action Plan for the Future a regional
approach will be applied. The Delegate of the Philippines
announced that preparations are underway for a regional
meeting on cultural landscapes to be held in the
Philippines in autumn 1994. The Australian Observer
underlined the importance of values of indigenous peoples
to be recognized both under natural and cultural criteria.
XVI.4 Several delegates complemented the Centre and
ICOMOS for the work carried out. The Committee adopted the
"Action Plan for the Future", including an amendment
proposed by the Delegate of Italy stressing the importance
of management experiences on the local and community level
(the amended Action Plan is attached as an Annex).
XVI.5 The Committee invited the Centre to undertake the
following actions in 1994 and report back to the eighteenth
session of the Committee:
- initiate comparative regional thematic studies;
- in line with the decisions taken by the Committee
regarding tentative lists (see para XI.6), give
priority to the revision of these lists to include
cultural landscapes;
- initiate the development of specific guidelines for
the management of cultural landscapes along the lines
of the already existing guidelines for cultural World
Heritage.
XVI.6 The Committee commended the regional approach for
future evaluations as outlined by the expert meeting, and
requested that the World Heritage Centre implements the
suggestions and recommendations made.
XVII. DATE AND PLACE OF THE EIGHTEENTH SESSION OF THE
BUREAU AND THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
XVII.1 The Committee decided that the eighteenth session
of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee will be held
at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris from 4 to 9 July 1994. The
Committee adopted the provisional agenda for the eighteenth
session of the Bureau as outlined in Document WHC-
93/CONF.002/12 with an additional agenda item
"International Assistance Projects, Reporting and
Evaluation".
XVII.2 The Delegate of Thailand transmitted the
invitation by the Royal Government of Thailand to host the
eighteenth session of the Committee in Thailand. The
Representative of the Director-General thanked Thailand for
this generous invitation. The Director expressed his thanks
and underlined that, however, a formal agreement following
*[57]
the decisions of the General Conference had to be worked
out. The next session of the Committee will be held from 12
to 18 December 1994.
XVII.3 Several members of the Committee expressed their
gratitude for the kind invitation by Thailand.
XVII.4 The German Delegation informed the Committee of
the intention of the German Government to host the
nineteenth session of the Committee in a World Heritage
site in Germany, provided that sufficient funding is
available. The Committee welcomed this initiative.
XVIII. OTHER QUESTIONS
XVIII.1 The Colombian Delegate emphazised the need to
analyse the spirit and objectives of the World Heritage
Convention in the context of recent developments and
negotiations related to environmental issues, in particular
the outcome of the UNCED meeting held in Rio de Janeiro in
1992. The Delegate requested the Secretariat to prepare
for the next Bureau meeting a reflection on possible
relations between the concept of the world natural heritage
and sustainable development and the linkages between the
World Heritage Convention, the Biodiversity Convention and
other Conventions. The Director of the World Heritage
Centre confirmed the importance UNESCO, in general, and the
Centre, more specifically, attribute to linking the various
conventions, and that UNESCO is actively involved in
follow-up actions to the Rio Conference.
XVIII.2 The Delegate of Spain informed the Committee that
at the invitation of the Spanish Government, an expert
meeting would be held in 1994 on cultural itineraries, such
as the Route of Santiago de Compostela. The Observer of
Canada referred to a related subject matter and informed
that in September 1994 a meeting would be held on "World
Heritage Canals". The Committee welcomed these initiatives.
XVIII.3 The Delegate of the United States referred to
Document WHC-93/CONF.002/8 on "Global and Thematic Studies"
and encouraged ICOMOS and the Centre to continue their
efforts to implement these studies, taking into
consideration work already carried out.
XVIII.4 ICOMOS drew the attention of the Committee to the
serious infrastructural problems in the Potsdam area in
Germany. The Committee expressed its concern about the
situation. The German Delegation expressed its readines to
collaborate with ICOMOS and the Centre to study this
matter.
XVIII.5 The Delegation of France presented to the
Committee a draft declaration concerning the destruction of
the heritage in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Representative of
the Director-General and several of the delegates confirmed
*[58]
that the draft declaration was in line with the resolutions
of the United Nations Security Council, as well as those of
the General Conference of UNESCO. Reference was also made
to the statement by the Deputy Director-General a.i. at the
inaugural session on the violation of international law.
XVIII.6 The proposed declaration was unanimously adopted
by the Committee, as amended by the Delegation of Italy.
(See Annex.) The Committee requested the Secretariat to
ensure the widest possible diffusion of the declaration in
various languages.
XIX. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION
XIX.1 On behalf of the Committee, the Chairperson, Ms
Olga Pizano, thanked the Rapporteur and the Secretariat of
the World Heritage Centre for their efficiency in carrying
out the work. She thanked all those who contributed
towards the success of the seventeenth session.
XIX.2 In the name of the participants, the Delegates of
Peru and the United States of America congratulated the
Chairperson, the interpreters and the host country staff
for their contribution to the success of the meeting.
XIX.3 The Observer of Australia expressed his
appreciation of the Secretariat's excellent work in
preparing the draft final report.
XIX.4 The Chairperson then declared the closure of the
seventeenth session of the Committee.
=====================================================================
ANNEX I
Distribution limited WHC-93/CONF.002/INF.3
Distribution limitée Cartagena, 11 December 1993
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND
CULTURAL ORGANIZATION/ORGANISATION DES
NATIONS UNIES POUR L'EDUCATION, LA SCIENCE ET LA CULTURE
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD
CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE/CONVENTION CONCERNANT
LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL CULTUREL ET NATUREL
World Heritage Committee/Comité du Patrimoine mondial
Seventeenth session/ Dix-septième session
Cartagena, Colombia/Carthagène, Colombie
6-11 December/6-11 Décembre 1993
*[ANNEX I/2]
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS/LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
I. STATES MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE/ETATS MEMBRES DU COMITE
BRAZIL/ BRESIL
Mr Carlos Fernando DELPHIM
Environmental Preservation and Protection
Brazilian Institute of Cultural Heritage
Ms Maria Dolores PENNA DE ALMEIDA CUNHA
Division of Intellectual Cooperation
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Itamaraty Annexo I, Sala 312
BRASILIA
CHINA/ CHINE
Mr Weichao YU
Director
Museum of Chinese History
State Bureau of Cultural Relics
Mr Feng JING
Programme Officer
Chinese National Commission for UNESCO
COLOMBIA/COLOMBIE
Dr Juan Luis MEJIA
Director-General
Colombian Institute for Culture
COLCULTURA
Calle 9 8-31
BOGOTA
Ms Olga PIZANO
Deputy Director of Cultural Heritage
COLCULTURA
Colombian Institute for Culture
Calle 9# 8-31
BOGOTA
*[ANNEX I/3]
Dr Jaime GIRON DUARTE
Director-General
Organismos y Conferencias Politicos Economicos
y Sociales Multilaterales
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ms Nora TRUJILLO BURGOS
Director
Asuntos Culturales
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Mr Rodrigo CORTES
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Ciudad Universitaria, Facultad de Artes
Calle del Sargento Mayor 6-74
BOGOTA
Dr Isabel VERNAZA
First Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Colombia to UNESCO
UNESCO House
1 rue Miollis
75015 PARIS
Ms Gloria OVIEDO CHAVES
Agregada Cultural
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
BOGOTA
Ms Mery Cecilia HURTADO
Councillor
Encargada de las funciones del Area de la UNESCO
del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores
Deleqados por el Inderena
Dr Nancy VALLEJO
General Secretary
INDERENA
Cra. 10 No. 20-30, P.5
BOGOTA
Dr Jorge HERNANDEZ
Investigador Cientifico de la Division de Fauna
Ms Leonor HERBERD
COLCULTURA-ICAN
Architect
Carrera 8 No. 8-87
BOGOTA
*[ANNEX I/4]
Dr Maragarita MARINO DE BOTERO
Presidenta de la Junta del Colegio Verde
en Villa de Leyva
Dr Martha ROJAS
Chief, Division of National Parks
Cra. 10 No. 20-30 P8
BOGOTA
Mr José Pablo URICOECHEL
Presidente de la S.C.E. Colombia
Union Internacional de Arquitectos (UIA)
Mr G. BUSTAMNTE
Director, Escuala Taller
Calle Universidad No. 36-145
CARTEGENA
Mr Rogelio SALMONA
Car. 5 No. 26-39
BOGOTA
Ms Carmen GARCIA BIELSA
Secretariat de la Planificacion Departamental
Centro, Plaza de la Proclamacion
BOGOTA
Mr Guillermo LAIQUELET
Asesor cultural de Bellas Artes
CARTAGENA
Mr Guillermo GALAN-CORREA
Director
Fundaciones del Banco de la Reoublica
Edificio Avianca
Calle 16, No.6
BOGOTA
Mr David MENESES
Subdirector
Fundacion Patrimonio Cultural Colombiano
Calle 80 No. 7-49
BOGOTA
Mr Guillermo LIEVANO
Director
Instituto de la Cultura
Gobernacion del Huila
A.A. No. 047
NEIVA
*[ANNEX I/5]
Mr Roberto PINEDA
Director
Instituto Colombiano de Antropologia
Calle 8 No. S-87
BOGOTA
Ms Esperanzo PAEZ
Direccion General de Asuntos Culturales
Delegados por COLCULTURA
Arquitectos:
Mr Alberto SALDARRIAGA
Mr Rogelio SALMONA
Mr Jose SALAZAR
Mr Pedro Miguel NAVAS
Ms Carolina BARCO DE BOTERO
Mr Lorenzo FONSECA
FRANCE
M. Jean-Louis PONS
Chargé de mission pour les Affaires internationales
à la Direction de la Nature et du Paysage
Ministère de l' Environnement
14, Boulevard du Général Leclerc
92524 NEUILLY-sur-SEINE
M. Léon PRESSOUYRE
Professeur
Université de æaris I
75005 PARIS
J- Mme Anne LEWIS-LOUBIGNAC
Conseiller technique
Commission nationale française pour l'UNESCO
42 avenue Raymond Poincaré
75116 PARIS
GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE
Mr Hans CASPARY
Conservator of Historic Monuments
Landesamt fur Denkmalpslege
Rheinland-Pfalz
Gottelmannstrasse 17
D-6500 Mainz 1
Germany
*[ANNEX I/6]
Mr Harald PLACHTER
Fachgehiet Naturschutz
Fachbereich Biologie
Lahnberge
35032 MARBURG
INDONE8IA/INDONE8IE
Mr HERMONO
Third Secretary
Embassy of Indonesia
BOGOTA
Colombia
ITALY/ITALIE
H.E. Mr Giancarlo LEO
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Italy to UNESCO
UNESCO House
1, rue Miollis
75015 PARIS
Mr Francesco FRANCIONI
Professor of International Law
University of Sienna
SIENNA
Mrs Margherita SABATINI
General Direction for Cultural Relations
Ministry for Foreign Affairs
Via N. Tilli 62
00156 ROME
Ms Rosalba TARDITO
Ministry of Culture
Via Passo di Fargorida 12
MILAN
Mr Pietro LAUREANO
Architect
via Passarelli 64
MATERA
Mr Astier OGBAI
via Passarelli 64
MATERA
*[ANNEX I/7]
JAPAN/JAPON
Mr Masaru WATANABE
Deputy Director
Second Cultural Affairs Division
Ministry of Foreign Affaris
TOKYO
Mr Kunio KIKUCHI
Director
Planning Division
Nature Conservation Bureau
Environment Agency
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku
TOKYO
Mr Migaku TANAKA
Councillor on Cultural Properties
Cultural Properties Protection Department
Agency for Cultural Affairs
TOKYO
Mr Hidetoshi SAITO
Chief Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties
Cultural Properties Protection Bureau
Agency for Cultural Affairs
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
3-2-2 Kasumigaseki Chiyodaku
TOKYO 100
Mr Masahiko KATO
Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties
Cultural Properties Protection Bureau
Agency for Cultural Affairs
TOKYO
Mr Kensei ODA
Assistant Director, Planning Division
National Forest Service
Forestry Agency
Ministry of Agriculture
Forestry & Fisheries
1-2-1 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ku
TOKYO
*[ANNEX I/8]
LEBANON/LIBAN
Mr Bahjat RIZK
Cultural Attachée
Permanent Delegation of the Lebanon to UNESCO
UNESCO House
1, rue Miollis
75015 PARIS
MEXICO / MEXIQUE
Mr Salvador DIAZ-BERRIO
Deputy Director
Technical Support and Training (INAH)
CORDOBA 45
MEXICO D.F. 06710
Mr Raul TOLEDO FADRIOS
Presidente Junto de Protection de
Monumentos del Estado
Ex Colegio San Luis Gonzago
Plazo St. Domingo
ZACATECAS
Mr Carlos FLORES MARIMI
Prsidente
ICOMOS-Mexico
Mazatlam 190
MEXICO 11 D.F.
CP 06140
Ms Rufina HERNANDEZ
Defensa del Patrimoine Construido
Av.2 Oriente No. 1214
Q.P. 72000
Ms Louise Noelle GRAS
Ahuehuetes Sur 260
MEXICO DF 11920
OMAN
Mr Gihazi AL RAWAS
First Secretary
Embassy of the Sultanate of Oman
2535 Belmont Road
WASHINGTON DC
USA
*[ANNEX I/9]
PERU/PEROU
Mr Martin YRIGOYEN
Ambassador
General Director Diffusion and Cultural Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Malecon Cisneros 1270
Miraflores
LIMA
PHILIPPINES
Mr Augusto F. VILLALON
Commissioner for Philippine Cultural Heritage
Philippine National Commission for UNESCO
107 Wilson Circle
SAN JUAN
1500 M. MANILA
Mrs Deanna ONGPIN-RECTO
Attaché to the Philippine Permanent
Delegation to UNESCO
UNESCO House
1, rue Miollis
75015 PARIS
SENEGAL
Mr Mbaye Bassine DIENG
Director
Historic and Ethnographic Culture
B.P. 4001
DAKAR
SPAIN/ESPAGNE
Mr D. José GUIRAO CABRERA
Director-General
Bellas Artes y Archivos
Ms Maria MARINE ISIDRO
Deputy Director of Monuments and Archaeology
ICRBC GRECO
SN 25048 MADRID
*[ANNEX I/10]
THAILAND/THAILANDE
Dr Adul WICHIENCHAROEN
Chairman
National Committee for Protection of the
World Cultural & Natural Heritage
BANGKOK
Mr Sunthad SOMCHEVITA
Secretary-General
Office of Environmental Policy & Planning
60/1 Phibulwattana
Rama IV Road
BANGKOK 10400
Mr Payung NOPSUWAN
Director of National Park Division
Royal Forest Department
BANGKOK
Mr Manit SIRIWAN
Director of Natural and Cultural Heritage
Conservation Division
Secretary to the National Committee on
World Heritage
BANGKOK
Mr Prachot SANGKHANUKIJ
Director of Archaeology Division
Fine Arts Department
BANGKOK
Mr Sod DAENGIAG
Archaeology Administrative Officer
Fine Arts Department
BANGKOK
Mr M.L. Chiranand HASDINTRA
Director of Economic Projects Division III
Bureau of Budget
Office of the Prime Minister
BANGKOK
Ms Srianong KUNGKAYA
Secretariat Officer
The National Committee for Protection of
World Cultural and Natural Heritage
Office of Environmental Policy and Planning
*[ANNEX I/11]
UNITED STATE8 OF AMERICA/ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE
Mr Robert MILNE
Chief, Office of International Affairs
National Park Service
Department of the Interior
P.O. Box 37127
WASHINGTON D.C.20013
Mr Richard COOK
Chief, International Affairs
National Park Service
P.O. Box 37127
WASHINGTON D.C. 20013
Mr E. Blaine CLIVER
Chief, Preservation Technology
National Park Service
P.O. Box 37127
WASHINGTON DC 20013-7127
Mr Richard G. RING
Manager
Everglades National Park
National Park Service
4001 State Route 9336
Homestead, Florida 33034
II. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVIS0RY CAPACITY/ORGANISATIONS
PARTICIPANT A TITRE CONSULTATIF
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES/CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL
DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES (ICOMOS)
Mr Jean-Louis LUXEN
Secretary General
75 rue du Temple
75003 PARIS
France
Mr Herb STOVEL
301 Strathearn Avenue
MONTREAL
Quebec
Mr Henry CLEERE
World Heritage Co-ordinator
75, rue du Temple
75003 PARIS
*[ANNEX I/12]
Ms Carmen ANON FELIU
Puerto Santamaria 49
MADRID 28043
Spain
Mr Augusto MOLINA
ICOMOS-Mexico
otivo 48
01030 MEXIFO DF
Mr Peter STOTT
ICOMOS-US
23 Bellevue Street
MEDFORD MA 02155
USA
THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)/UNION MONDIALE POUR LA NATURE
(UICN)
Mr James THORSELL
Senior Advisor - Natural Heritage
Rue Mauverney, 28
CH-1196 GLAND
Switzerland
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESERVATION AND THE
RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY/CENTRE INTERNATIONAL D'ETUDES POUR
LA CONSERVATION ET LA RESTAURATION DES BIENS CULTURELS (ICCROM)
Mr Jukka JOKILEHTO
Chief
Architectural Conservation Programme
Via di S. Michele, 13
00153 ROME
Italy
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS/CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MUSEES
(ICOM)
Ms Diana TORRES DE OSPINA
Chairperson
ICOM National Committee of Colombia
*[ANNEX I/13]
III. OBSERVERS/OBSERVATEURS
AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE
Mr Jonathan BROWN
Counsellor
Deputy Permanent Delegate to UNESCO
Australian Embassy
4 rue Jean Rey
75015 PARIS
BULGARIA/BULGARIE
Mr Branimor NATOV
Deputy Minister
Ministry of Environment
67 Gladetone str.
SOFIA
CANADA
Mme Gisèle CANTIN
Chief, Affaires Intergouvernementales
Service Canadien des Parcs
Environnement du Canada
25, rue Eddy
HULL, Quebec K1A OH3
CUBA
Ms Marta ARJONA
Director, Cultural Heritaqe
J Calle 4 y 11 Vedado
LA HABANA
CZECH REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
Mr V. BUCEK
Ambassador
Embassy of the Czech Republic
Av. 7 - 113 - 16
BOGOTA
Colombia
*[ANNEX I/14]
EL SALVADOR
Mr Alexander A. KRAVETZ
Embassador of El Salvador to Colombia
Embassy of El Salvador
Crra. 9a, No. 80-15
BOGOTA
Colombia
Ms Maria I. ARSUZ
Director
Cultural Heritage of El Salvador
Ave. la Revolucien
BENIJO SN
GUINEA/GUINEE
Mr Lancei BAKAYOKO
Director-General
MIFER
B.P. 837
CONAKRY
HOLY SEE/SAINT-SIEGE
H.E. Mr Ernesto Gallina
Archbishop, Apostolic Nuncio
Delegate for International
Governmental Organizations
Vatican City
ROME
Mr Gilberto HUYOS HOYOS
Rector of the Cathedral
Apartado 400
Calle Arzobispardo No 34-55
BOGOTA
HUNGRY/HONGRIE
Mr Ferenc SZONYI
Chargé d'Affaires
Embassy of Hungry to Colombia
Bogota
Colombia
*[ANNEX I/15]
NEPAL
Mr Khadga Man SHRESTHA
Director-General
Department of Archaeology
Ministry of Education, Culture and
Social Welfare
KATHAMNDU
NEW ZEALAND
Mr David TAYLOR
Deputy director
Environment Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade
The Terrace
WELLINGTON
PERU/PEROU
Arq. Hugo BOGADO
Director, Cultural Heritage
Ministry of Education
Fecicianfeci 688
ASUNCION
Arq. Julio Cesar ESCOBAR
General Directorate of Tourism
ASUNCION
Arq. ZORAIDA MEZQUITA
General Directorate of Tourism
ASUNCION
ROMANIA/ROUMANIE
Mr Ioan OPRIS
Director-General
Ministry of Culture
BUCHAREST
SLOVAK REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE
Mrs Viera DVORAKOVA
Architect
Institute for the Protection of Monuments
Zaveterna 9
BRATISLAVA 84107
*[ANNEX I/16]
SWEDEN SUEDE
Ms Birgitta HOBERG
Head of Department
Central Board of National Antiquities
P.O. Box 5405
11484 STOCKHOLM
SWITZERLAND/SUISSE
Mr Jean-Marc BOULGARIS
Ambassador of Switzerland to Colombia
Swiss Embassy
BOGOTA
Colombia
VENEZUELA
Ms Elina LOVERA
UNESCO Coro Centre
Parque Res. Los Caobos
Apto. 46
Torre A
La Candelaria
CARACAS
Ms Ana Maria REYES
UNESCO Coro Centre
Calle sucre No.22
LA VELA DE CORO
V. SECRETARIAT
Mr Adnan BADRAN
Deputy Director-General a.i.
Mr. Bernd von DROSTE
Director
World Heritage Centre
Mr Mounir BOUCHENAKI
Director
Division of Cultural Heritage
Ms Breda PAVLIC
World Heritage Centre
*[ANNEX I/17]
Mr Harold EIDSVIK
World Heritage Centre
Mr Mark WARREN
Bureau of the Budget
Mr Herman van HOOFF
World Heritage Centre
Ms Mechtild ROSSLER
World Heritage Centre
Mr Gérard BOLLA
UNESCO Consultant
Ms F. TRUEL
Interpretation Division
Ms Jane DEGEORGES
World Heritage Centre
Ms Marianne RAABE
World Heritage Centre
Mr David MARTEL
World Heritage Centre
UNESCO/UNDP
Mr Sylvio MUTAL
Chief, UNDP/UNESCO Project
Casilla 4480
LIMA
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ANNEX II
Limited distribution WHC-93/CONF.002/1Prov./Rev.
Original: French
Paris, 28 November 1993
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Seventeenth Session
Cartagena, Colombia
6 to 11 December 1993
REVISED PROVISIONAL AGENDA
1. Opening of the session by the Director-General or his
representative.
2. Adoption of the provisional agenda.
3. Election of the Chairperson, Vice-Chairpersons and
Rapporteur.
4. Report of the Secretariat on activities undertaken since
the sixteenth session of the Committee.
5. Report of the Rapporteur of the seventeenth session of the
Bureau of the World Heritage Committee.
6. Establishment of a sub-committee to examine budgetary
questions.
7. Revision of the Operational Guidelines concerning the
implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
8. Examination of methodological aspects of monitoring of the
state of conservation of properties.
9. Report on the state of conservation of properties inscribed
on the World Heritage List.
10. Examination of proposals for inscription of cultural and
natural properties on the World Heritage List and List of
World Heritage in Danger.
*[ANNEX II/2]
11. Promotional activities.
12. Examination of the application of the cultural landscape
criterion.
13. Requests for international assistance.
14. Situation of the World Heritage Fund and adoption of a
budget for 1994 (following recommendations of the Sub-
Committee).
15. Date and place of the eighteenth session of the Bureau of
the World Heritage Committee.
16. Other business
17. Adoption of the Report by the Committee.
18. Closure of the session.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ANNEX III
ADDRESS BY MR A. BADRAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL a.i.
OF UNESCO AT THE SEVENTEENTH SESSION OF THE
WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Cartagena, Colombia, 6 December 1993
Mr Chairman,
Honoured representatives of the Government of Colombia,
Members of the World Heritage Committee,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Three weeks ago, on learning of the destruction of the
graceful sixteenth-century bridge "Stari Most" of Mostar, in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was not a World Heritage site but
nonetheless a great centuries-old symbol to Bosnian and many
other people, the Director-General of UNESCO stated: "By
destroying it, the perpetrators of this disgraceful act are
trying to eradicate the history of a country and its people. They
are thereby also destroying the bridges of mutual understanding
built by people of different origins and religious beliefs who
had learnt to live together in harmony."
This quote strikes me as an appropriate way to begin my
address to the participants of this seventeanth session of the
World Heritage Committee, whom I have the honour and the pleasure
to greet on behaif of Mr Federico Mayor, the Director-General of
UNESCO. It is an illustration of the great importance UNESCO
attaches to the preservation of outstanding cultural, natural and
mixed sites! which are not only expressions of Nature's and
humankind's creative genius, but are also deep-rooted symbois OL
the latter's hopes and aspirations.
Before elaborating this further, I should first like to
convey our heartiest thanks to the Government of Colombia for its
generous offer to host this important meeting. More specifically,
our sincere gratitude is addressed foremost to the Colombian
Institute for Culture (COLCULTURA), and particularly to Ms Olga
Pizano, the Deputy Director for Cultural Heritage and her team,
whose efficiency and friendliness have been a great asset in
organizing the meeting so successfully. May I also take this
opportunity to greet the representatives of the newly elected
members of the World Heritage Committee, namely, the delegates
of Brazil, France, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Niger and the United
States of America, and to thank most sincerely the outgoing
Chairman, Mr Robert Milne, for his endeavours to promote the
World Heritage Convention.
*[ANNEX III/2]
Mr Chairman,
As you are well aware, the General Conference of UNESCO
ended its twenty-seventh session only three weeks ago. Permit me,
therefore, to present to you briefly some of the salient points
emerging from its work as regards the preservation of the world's
cultural and natural heritage.
The implementation of the World Heritage Convention was
discussed in Commission IV, within the framework of UNESCO's
Major Programme Area III (Culture: Past, Present and Future) and
on the basis of the 1992-1993 Report of the World Heritage
Committee - more particularly the Committee's Strategic
Orientations, adopted in Santa Fe, in December 1992. Without
going into detail, I am happy to inform you that there was
unanimous agreement that the preservation of cultural and natural
propert ies wh ich are of outstanding un iversa l va lue rema ins among
UNESCO' s priority tasks. This is reflected in paragraphs (a), (b)
and (e) of Resolution 3.1 which invites the Director-General,
inter alia:
"(a) to promote the Convention for the Protection of the
World Cultural and Natural Heritage among Member States and
the general public, to ensure systematic and continuous
monitoring of sites cavered by the Convention, to identify
action to be taken to ensure their conservation, and to
mobilize the resources required for that purpose; (b) to
enhance preventive action in the Member States for the
protection of cultural property and to facilitate prompt
intervention in case of natural or human-made disasters;
and (e) to mobilize international support for safeguarding
operations and to strengthen on-site training of
conservation specialists."
The debate at the General Conference underlined also the
need to set up within UNESCO a specialised data-bank and
documentation service based on the information provided by
systematic monitoring of the World Heritage sites. In view of the
increasing threats to some of the sites and the need to assure
better protection therefore, the General Conference adopted also
a resolution on "co-operation for the safeguarding of the
ecocultural heritage of the historical Angkor area" which, inter
alia, requests the Director-General "(i) to fully implement the
decision of the World Heritage Committee", and "(iv) to mobilize
international support for safeguarding operations with a special
effort to reinforce the international co-operation to save
Angkor." As for Jerusalem, the General Conference adopted a
resolution which invites the Director-General "to continue his
efforts to secure the implementation of UNESCO' s decisions and
resolutions concerning Jerusalem, firmly ensuring that the
mission conferred on UNESCO by its Constitution, the 1972
Convention and the various resolutions concerning Jerusalem is
respected."
*[ANNEX III/3]
The General Conference furthermore stressed the need to
develop innovative communication and education projects designed
to increase awareness and support for the World Heritage
programme, particularly among decision-makers and the young.
Guided by the decisions adopted by the World Heritage
Committee at its sixteenth session held last year in Santa Fe,
New Mexico, and taking into consideration the resolutions of
UNESCO' s General Conference, the work of UNESCO' s World Heritage
Centre will focus in 1994-1995 upon: servicing the World Heritage
statutory bodies; completing at least two thematic studies as
part of a global study; the establishment of a representative
World Heritage List; technical, i.e., preparatory assistance for
the implementation of the World Heritage Convention; monitoring
of the state of conservation of World Heritage sites and,
finally, World Heritage promotion and education. The
implementation of this Workplan, as underlined in its
introductory part, can only be achieved through close and
permanent cooperation with all relevant units within the UNESCO
Secretariat, both at Headquarters and in the field, as well as
with the full involvement of the States Parties themselves and
the concerned international bodies, notably ICCROM, ICOMOS and
the IUCN, to mention but these.
The plan introduces a number of novelties, the most
important being the systematic monitoring of the state of
conservation of the World Heritage sites in different regions of
the world. Your Committee gave high priority to this field of
action at its last year's session, and a special budget line was
created to that effect. As you know, a pilot programme for
monitoring cultural and mixed sites in Latin America and the
Caribbean is being implemented since 1991 as a joint UNDP/UNESCO
Regional Project. This programme is expected to conclude in 1994
and you will hear more about it during this very session. On my
part, let me just say that we hope that a regional World Heritage
state of conservation report, the first of its kind, can be
produced in the near future for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Furthermore, an expert meeting on monitoring methodology was
held in Cambridge,UK, just last November, and its results have
been included in the working documents for this session.
Depending on the outcome of your deliberations, the World
Heritage Centre, jointly with the advisory bodies, is ready to
set up systematic monitoring programmes for other regions, more
particularly for Africa and Asia.
The elaboration of a more comprehensive multimedia information-
promotion and education strategy, adjusted to various "target
groups" and especially to children and young people, and the
exploration and development of an overall marketing strategy
requested by the World Heritage Committee under Strategic Goal
No. 5 (Increasing public awareness and support) are other new
elements proposed in the Centre 's Workplan. In addition to
*[ANNEX III/4]
these, the programme now also includes cultural landscapes. All
this will necessarily demand significant human and financial
resources, and it will be up to you to decide on these questions
in more detail in the coming days.
Among the innovations that the World Heritage Centre is
expected to launch within the next two-year period, I should like
to point out particularly the creation of an increasing number
of national World Heritage Associations which are meant to
strengthen the decentralization of the work regarding the
implementation of the Convention. This, as you may well know,
could be achieved through various means, one of them stemming
possibly from the permanent information-exhibition centres which
some of the World Heritage cities intend to create with UNESCO's
help. Further along this line of thinking it is also possible to
envisage "twinning" arrangements, whereby the more well-off
States Parties could help those that are less fortunate. I am
confident that the members of this Committee as well as the
observers present at this meeting, given their vast knowledge and
experience, will be able to elaborate these proposals in greater
detail.
Mr Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Fully aware of this meeting's agenda and the demanding task
ahead of you, I wish you, on behalf of the Director-General, as
well as in my own name, a very successful session. May you be
guided in your deliberations by the full certitude that the
Secretariat of UNESCO stands, as always, ready to assist you in
the complex, yet so noble task of promoting the implementation
of the 1972 World Heritage Convention.
Finally, in conclusion, I have the pleasure of informing you
that thanks to the Centre 's particular effort, the newly
inscribed sites will this year be presented publicly at a photo-
exhibit which will be inaugurated by the Director-General at
UNESCO' s Headquarters on 20 December, i.e., only a week after
your deliberations. Such exhibits, we hope, will henceforth
become standard practice.In the midst of our daily concerns,
frequently burdened with rather tedious tasks, the World Heritage
programme offers us moments of beauty, inspiration and - allow
me to say - an invitation to dream. Your work, Ladies and
Gentlemen, is therefore of utmost importance and we look forward
to cooperating with all of you in the coming years.
*[further annexes]
IV. Report on the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention since the sixteenth session
of the World Heritage Committee
V. World Heritage Committee Declaration on Bosnia
VI. Report of the Expert Meeting on "Approaches to
the Monitoring of World Heritage Properties:
"Exploring ways and means", Cambridge, U.K. (1 to
4 November 1993)
VII. Report of the International Expert Meeting on
"Cultural Landscapes of Outstanding Universal
Value", Templin, Germany (12 to 17 October 1993)
VIII.Action Plan for the Future (Cultural Landscapes)
*[EOF]