PDF Version (1.10MB)

World Heritage

23 COM

Distribution limited

WHC-99/CONF.209/22 Paris, 2 March 2000 Original: English/French

 

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND
CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

 

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

 

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

 

Twenty-third session
Marrakesh, Morocco

29 November – 4 December 1999

 

REPORT

 

 

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

			Page
I.	Opening Session			1
II.	Adoption of the Agenda and the Timetable			2
III.	Report By The Secretariat On The Activities Undertaken Since The Twenty-Second Session Of The World Heritage Committee			2
IV.	Reports of the Rapporteurs on the Sessions of the World Heritage Bureau			4
V.	Report on the Decision of the General Assembly Of States Parties With Regard To "Ways And Means To Ensure A Repre-Sentative World Heritage List"			4
VI.	Progress Report On The Implementation Of The Regional Actions Described In The Global Strategy Action Plan Adopted By The Committee At Its Twenty-Second Session			5
VII.	Follow-Up To The Work Of The Consultative Body Of The World Heritage Committee			6
VIII.	Information On Tentative Lists And Examination Of Nominations Of Cultural And Natural Properties To The List Of World Heritage In Danger And World Heritage List			7
IX.	Periodic Reporting: Regional Strategies For Periodic Reporting			22
X.	State Of Conservation Of Properties Inscribed On The List Of World Heritage In Danger And On The World Heritage List			23
XI.	Activities Concerning World Heritage Documentation, Information And Education			40
XII.	Evaluation Of International Assistance: Examination Of The Recommendations Of The Twenty-Third Session Of The Bureau Of The World Heritage Committee Con-Cerning Prioritization In Granting International Assistance			40
XIII.	Revision Of The Operational Guidelines For The Implementation Of The World Heritage Convention			41
XIV.	Examination Of The World Heritage Fund And Approval Of The Budget For 2000 And Presentation Of A Pro-Visional Budget For 2001			42
XV.	Requests For International Assistance			47
XVI.	Date, Place And Provisional Agenda Of The Twenty-Fourth Session Of The Bureau Of The World Heritage Committee			53
XVII.	Date And Place Of The Twenty-Fourth Session Of The World Heritage Committee			54
XVIII.	Other Business			54
XIX.	Closure Of The Session			54
Annexes
I.	Royal Letter of His Majesty King Mohammed VI of Morocco			57
II.	List of Participants			61
III.	Speech of the Director-General of UNESCO, Mr. Koichiro Matsuura			75
IV.	Declaration of the Youth from the Arab Region on World Heritage			79
V.	Map of Lorentz National Park (Indonesia)			81
VI.	Statement by H.E. the Federal Minister of Culture and Tourism, Nigeria on Sukur Cultural Landscape, Nigeria			83
VII.	Statement by H.E. the Ambassador of the Republic of South Africa to France on Robben Island, Greater St. Lucia Wetland National Park and the Fossil Hominid Sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai, and Environs, South Africa			85
VIII.	Report of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau (WHC-99/ CONF.209/6) relating to the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List			87
IX.	Statement of the United States of America on Mining Activities			111
X.	Provisional Agenda of the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Bureau			113
XI.	Statement by the Hungarian Delegation concerning the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee			115
XII.	Statement by the Australian Delegation concerning the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee			117

I.OPENING SESSION

I.1 The twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee was held in Marrakesh, Morocco, from 29 November to 4 December 1999. It was attended by all twenty-one members of the World Heritage Committee: Australia, Belgium, Benin, Canada, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Ecuador, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of South Africa, Thailand, and Zimbabwe.

I.2 The following States Parties to the Convention who are not members of the Committee were represented as observers: Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Cyprus, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Holy See, Indonesia, India, Israel, Japan, Lithuania, Mongolia, Nepal, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

I.3 Representatives of the advisory bodies to the Committee, the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and 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 meeting was also attended by representatives and observers of the following international governmental organizations (IGOs), international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs): Arch Foundation, Association for the Safeguarding of the Kasbah of Algiers, Heritage Friends of Morocco (APM), High-Tech Visual Promotion Centre, International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME), International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA), International Federation of Shingon Buddhism, International Foundation of Historical Heritage (Canada), International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), Islamic Organization for Education, Science and Culture, (ISESCO), Nature Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Organization of the Arab League for Education, Science and Culture (ALECSO), Organization of World Heritage Cities (OWHC), Pro Esteros Mexico, UNEP/PAM Project, UN Foundation,. (The full List of Participants is attached as Annex II to this report).

I.4 The twenty–third session of the World Heritage Committee was opened by Mr Abdelaziz Touri, Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, who presented Mr Mohammed Achaari, Minister for Cultural Affairs of Morocco, to read the welcome message of His Majesty King Mohammed VI of Morocco (The Royal Letter is attached as Annex I to this report).

I.5 In His Message, the King welcomed the participants and expressed the pleasure of the Kingdom of Morocco in hosting the Committee meeting in the prestigious historical capital of Marrakesh. He emphasized the progress made in the preservation of cultural and natural heritage which he attributed to the overreaching agreement by countries of the same thinking, that of preserving local and national heritage, a heritage which belongs to humankind. He noted that the current Committee session was the last during this century, and its future activities would be affected by on-going changes taking place in the areas of communication and information. On the other hand, these changing conditions will provide opportunities to improve future actions to understand and to give greater depth to the notion of world cultural and historical heritage and the multiple aspects of human civilization.

I.6 His Majesty praised UNESCO for its leadership in the protection of the cultural and natural heritage. Referring to the Kingdom of Morocco, the King’s message said that since independence, the country has been deeply aware of the need for the preservation of its legacy. Through an initiative taken by the late King, His Majesty King Hassan II, Morocco has been working particularly with Moroccan and other experts, in the restoration of the Royal Palace of Fez. The Royal Letter concluded by expressing interest as regards the natural heritage and issues of the oral tradition, where man is inseparable from his environment, and that we have the responsibility to protect the verbally transmitted heritage that was greatly threatened. Reminding the participants of the responsibilities of humankind, His Majesty thanked UNESCO for deciding to propose the nomination of Jamaa Lafna Square in Marrakesh as oral heritage of humankind, an honour for Morocco. He noted with pleasure the presence of Mr. Koichiro Matsuura, Director-General of UNESCO, and referred to his great competence and deep understanding of issues of global civilization. After congratulating Mr Matsuura on his election and having expressed confidence in his leadership of the Organization, the King wished the Committee success in its work and welcomed once again the participants to the City of Marrakesh.

I.7 At the invitation of the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, and in his first address to the World Heritage Committee in his capacity as the Director- General of UNESCO, Mr. Koichiro Matsuura, welcomed the participants to the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee. He transmitted his sincere gratitude to the Kingdom and the people of Morocco for their generosity and hospitality. Mr. Matsuura mentioned that, it had been several years since a meeting of the World Heritage Committee was held in an Arab country, and in this regard, he expressed his satisfaction that the meeting was being held in Morocco and in the beautiful City of Marrakesh.

I.8 Mr. Matsuura took the occasion to pay tribute to the late King Hassan II, whom he said brought to Morocco a policy of foresight and vision concerning the protection of cultural and natural heritage. He noted that it was indeed in 1980 when, with the assistance of UNESCO, the late King led the initiative to launch the international campaign for the protection of the Medina of Fez, which was followed by the inscription of Fez in the World Heritage List. Mr. Matsuura recalled that it was the late King Hassan II who facilitated the preservation of the assemblage of the world’s most important architecture, as well as the living traditional art.

I.9 Welcoming again the participants, Mr. Matsuura expressed his high esteem for the work of the World Heritage Committee of the 1972 Convention on the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. He reminded the participants that the work of the Committee is among others, the tangible expression of international solidarity and co-operation embodied in the World Heritage Convention.

I.10 The Director-General informed the participants that there are currently 158 States Parties who have adhered to the Convention, which represents the majority of the 188 UNESCO Member States. He welcomed the States Parties attending the Committee session for the first time and congratulated the States Parties elected recently by the twelfth session of the General Assembly. Mr Matsuura, addressing the newly-elected Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Mr Abdelaziz Touri, Director of the Department of Cultural Heritage in Morocco, commented that his election was fully justified, being a respected expert involved in day-to-day conservation of the cultural heritage, a person of experience at the heart of the Committee where he has worked for several years.

I.11 Turning to the values of World Heritage sites, Mr Matsuura emphasized that the Committee’s deliberations and decisions on the established criteria for World Heritage, will be important not only for the future protection of the exceptional world cultural and natural heritage, but also for important national and local sites. He stressed the importance of developing a collective ethic for heritage conservation which he viewed as a major challenge in the face of economic globalisation.

I.12 As the Director–General of UNESCO, Mr. Matsuura said that he will endeavour to strengthen the World Heritage Centre, to enable it to respond to the increasing demands of national and local authorities, of site managers, research institutes, development agencies, the media and the public.

I.13 In emphasizing the importance and the large quantity of work of the Committee, Mr. Matsuura observed the need to facilitate its work. He also mentioned the need for rigour, particularly in matters dealing with the inscription of sites in the World Heritage List, the evaluation of international assistance requests and in addressing the root causes of various threats to World Heritage. The Director-General suggested the linkage of preparatory assistance and training grants to the Global Strategy and priority approval for requests from Least Developed Countries and Low Income Countries, particularly for technical co-operation.

I.14 In conclusion, he emphasized the importance of public awareness-building and education for World Heritage conservation. Without education the survival of the World Heritage is at risk. He informed the Committee that as the Director-General of UNESCO, and working with the General Conference and the Executive Board, he would seek to further strengthen the World Heritage Centre. (The Director-General’s speech is attached as Annex III to this report).

I.15 Mr Touri, the Chairperson, thanked the Director-General of UNESCO for his kind words. He then thanked the Director–General for having presented on behalf of UNESCO the following two medals: Victor Hugo Medal to His Excellency, the Minister for Cultural Affairs, Mr. Mohammed Achaari; and the Aristotle Medal to Mr. Abdelaziz Touri, the Director of Cultural Heritage, and the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee.

I.16 The Chairperson informed the Committee that the First Arab States World Heritage Youth Forum had taken place at the Al Akhawayn University in Ifrane, Morocco, from 22-28 November. The Forum, organized within the framework of UNESCO’s Special Project "Young People’s Participation in World Heritage Preservation and Promotion" with the support of NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation) and the Rhône-Poulenc Foundation (France), was attended by young people and secondary school teachers from twelve countries in the Arab region.

I.17 In previous years, international Youth Fora had been held in Norway (1995) and Japan (1998), and regional Youth Fora in Croatia (1996), Zimbabwe (1996), China (1997) and Senegal (1999). The Youth Forum for the Arab region coincided with the recent publication, in Arabic, of the Educational Resource Kit for Teacher’s entitled "World Heritage in young hands" translated with the assistance of the UNESCO Office in Amman, Jordan. The Youth Forum was organized in collaboration with the UNESCO Office in Rabat, Morocco and the Al Akhawayn University.

I.18 At the invitation of the Chairperson, the President of the Al Akhawayn University, Dr Rachid Benmokhtar, gave a brief summary of the Youth Forum. He referred to his pleasure in having welcomed young people from the Arab region to his University as the Youth Forum reflected the goals and research of the University in relation to cultural heritage and its conservation. The University aims to instil in its students a spirit of open-mindedness, tolerance and peace. The location of Ifrane had provided an appropriate setting for the Forum enriched by Berber culture and extraordinary biodiversity. The young people at the Youth Forum actively participated in plenary sessions, field visits to the World Heritage sites of Fez and Volubilis, workshops on traditional calligraphy, handicrafts and communication technology and prepared a Forum newspaper. Dr Rachid Benmokhtar thanked UNESCO for having taken the initiative to organise the Forum.

I.19 Two student representatives from the Youth Forum read an appeal adopted by all thirty-eight students at the Youth Forum in Ifrane. They expressed their commitment to the conservation of heritage and requested the assistance of UNESCO to organise further youth forum in the region. The students referred to the role of media and modern technology in raising awareness of the necessity of preserving the world’s heritage and noted the important role of revitalisation of traditional crafts in the maintenance of heritage and identity. They concluded by calling on the young people of the world to join with young people in the Arab region to protect their World Heritage. The Student Pledge from Ifrane is included as Annex IV of this report.

I.20 The Director of the Centre sincerely thanked the young people for their presentation and for their energy and commitment in favour of heritage awareness and conservation.

 

II.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND THE TIMETABLE

II.1 The Committee adopted the agenda (WHC-99/CONF./209/1), the Annotated Agenda (WHC-99/CONF.209/2) and the Provisional Calendar with modifications. Following unanimous agreement, the Committee decided to discuss the Agenda Item 7 on ‘Follow-up to the work of the Consultative Body to the World Heritage Committee’, to enable a working group to be established under this agenda item and for it to complete its task as early as possible during the session. In response to the interventions by the Delegates of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Hungary, Thailand and Zimbabwe, the Chairperson proposed to hold discussions on Item 7 before agenda Item 10 which deals with the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger and the World Heritage List, at the end of the afternoon session on Monday, 29 November, 1999. This was accepted and he then requested the Secretariat to redraft the timetable accordingly.

 

III.REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT ON THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE TWENTY-SECOND SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

III.1 Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, in his capacity as Director of the World Heritage Centre and Secretary to the World Heritage Committee, presented the report on activities undertaken since the last session of the World Heritage Committee in 1998.

III.2 He referred to the Information Document WHC-99/CONF/209.INF.5 and used an audiovisual presentation to highlight the important points of the document.

III.3 The Director of the Centre indicated that Chad and Israel had ratified the Convention in 1999, bringing the number of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to 158. Concerning new nominations for inscription, the Director noted that in spite of the fact that the majority of these new nominations emanated from western European countries, nominations have also been received for the first time from the following five States Parties, Bosnia and Herzegovina, South Africa, Saint Christopher & Nevis, Suriname and Turkmenistan. He indicated that this was a positive sign for better representivity of the List in the future. The Director also underlined that 109 of the 158 States Parties have submitted tentative lists of sites they may wish to nominate in future in conformity with the format prescribed by the Operational Guidelines.

III.4 The Director then emphasized the importance of the work of the Global Strategy to ensure a representative World Heritage List and drew the attention of the Committee to a certain number of regional thematic meetings that had been held on this subject. He mentioned, in particular, the expert meeting on African cultural landscapes which was held in Kenya in March, activities and missions carried out in the Arab region which will contribute towards the organization of a series of workshops to strengthen conservation capacity in the field of natural heritage in the region and to the second Global Strategy Meeting for the Pacific Region held in Vanuatu in association with the Pacific Islands Museums Association (PIMA). He also stated that a meeting was held in Brastagi, Indonesia, in December 1998, organized jointly by the Ministry of Forestry of Indonesia and the World Heritage Centre, to study how the Convention may be implemented in the framework of protecting biodiversity of forest habitats. The Director mentioned two additional meetings on cultural landscapes, one in Slovakia in June 1999 concerning the preparation of Management Guidelines for Cultural Landscapes and the other in Poland in October 1999, convening experts from fourteen States Parties from Eastern Europe and representatives of the three advisory bodies. He also referred to the efforts undertaken by the Centre to ensure better representativity of the List in Asia and the Caribbean.

III.5 With regard to the conservation of World Heritage sites and the presentation of the periodic reports, the Director recalled the decisions of the Committee and the General Assembly concerning this issue. He informed the Committee that a Circular Letter with the new format and explanatory notes had been addressed to all States Parties, and that an information brochure on the presentation of periodic reports had been elaborated and distributed in 1999 as a follow-up to these decisions.

III.6 The Director indicated that two expert meetings organized by ICCROM were held in 1999. These meetings had elaborated a structure for a reference manual for monitoring the state of conservation. Numerous initiatives were cited by the Director which had been undertaken by some States Parties in support of the submission of periodic reports, such as training seminars organized by the Russian Federation and the Republic of Korea, as well as other national seminars. The Director emphasized the importance of these seminars and indicated that other seminars and workshops are under preparation for 2000, particularly in Asia. Among the initiatives undertaken, the Director presented a new database, available on the Centre’s Intranet, which incorporates all information relating to sites situated in Asia. He encouraged the creation of similar databases for other regions.

III.7 Sixty-seven reports, nineteen of which concerned sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, were submitted to the Centre in 1999. The Director noted that a majority of the reports submitted for examination by the Committee concerned sites situated in Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. He expressed concern about the increasing number of serious problems facing certain sites, in particular the Kathmandu Valley (Nepal) where recent deterioration of the historic fabric has been reported by the UNESCO mission that took place in October 1999. He also mentioned, among other sites, the Group of Monuments at Hampi in India, where two bridges are currently under construction, Machu Picchu in Peru where a cable car is proposed and the Iguazu National Park in Brazil which has suffered negative effects due to the construction of a road which crosses the site, and to numerous helicopter flights in this area. The many natural catastrophes that had caused important damage, notably in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the need to develop specific activities to assist the States concerned, were mentioned by the Director.

III.8 In reporting on the implementation of International Assistance, the Director drew the attention of the Committee to the fact that 40% of Preparatory Assistance had been allocated to natural sites. He continued by informing the Committee that Technical Co-operation had to a great extent been allocated to African natural sites and that the greater part of preparatory assistance for cultural sites had been to support sites in Europe, and Latin American and the Caribbean.

III.9 The Director then referred to activities of the Centre’s Documentation, Information and Education Unit, emphasizing the importance of these activities, in particular the development of a modern information management system. He also underlined the need to prepare specific information documents oriented to respond on the one hand to the needs of States Parties, and on the other to the public at large and the media. He also presented the UNESCO Special Project "Young people’s participation in the preservation and promotion of World Heritage" and informed the Committee that the most recent Youth Forum was held at the Al Akhawayn University in Ifrane, Morocco, during which young people of the Arab region had the opportunity to improve their knowledge of the Convention by attending numerous workshops. He also recalled that the Educational Kit entitled "World Heritage in young hands" is now available in Arabic. He highlighted the need to strengthen this programme.

III.10 In the framework of activities and co-operation with the advisory bodies, the Director reported on a certain number of meetings held during the year and expressed satisfaction with the increasing co-operation between the advisory bodies and the Centre.

III.11 The Director evoked the spirit of co-operation that existed between the Centre and the other Division of UNESCO, notably the Division of Ecological Sciences, the Division of Earth Sciences, the Education Sector and the Division of Cultural Heritage. He also noted the increasing number of activities undertaken by the regional offices and focal points in collaboration with the Centre.

III.12 In emphasizing the need to strengthen international co-operation and facilitate exchanges between the States, the Director presented a new Internet site on Afghanistan, funded by the World Heritage Fund and the Funds-in-Trust of Professor Hirayama. This site will soon be available on the web. He also spoke of the co-operation between the Centre and organizations such as The World Bank, UNDP, with particular reference to the activities carried out in co-operation with the United Nations Foundation, thanks to which several projects, in particular the Galapagos Islands and sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, have been financed.

III.13 In the framework of co-operation between the States, the Director cited as an example, the Nara Seminar for the Integrity and Development of Historic Cities that provided the opportunity for a dialogue between eleven cities inscribed on the World Heritage List. He also indicated that the Agreement between France and UNESCO for the Protection and Development of Monumental and Urban Heritage is now operational. Sixteen activities have been defined in this Agreement which aim at supporting under-represented States Parties in the preparation of nomination files and providing technical co-operation input.

III.14 With regard to the follow-up of the work of the Consultative Body, the Director recalled the terms of reference of the Strategic Task Force on the future of the World Heritage Convention.

III.15 The Director also presented the organizational chart of the Centre and insisted on the need to strengthen the Centre at all levels. He drew the attention of the Committee to the need to regularize the five posts requested during the thirteenth session of the UNESCO General Conference to respond to the most urgent needs. He also emphasized that many core functions of the Centre were currently being carried out by contractors.

III.16 The Chairperson thanked the Director of the Centre, for his excellent presentation. The Delegations of Ecuador, Japan and the Republic of Korea, also thanked the Centre and noted the wide diversity of activities undertaken by the Centre. They also insisted upon the need to strengthen the structure and the staff of the Centre.

III.17 The Delegate of Republic of Korea specifically mentioned his satisfaction with the close collaboration between the Centre and States Parties in the Asian region. He expressed his appreciation for the support provided to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea referring to it as an exemplary case of promoting "the cultural of peace in the framework of the World Heritage Convention".

 

IV.REPORTS OF THE RAPPORTEURS ON THE SESSIONS OF THE WORLD HERITAGE BUREAU

IV.1 The Rapporteur of the twenty-third session of the Bureau (5 – 10 July 1999), and the third extraordinary session of the World Heritage Committee, 12 July 1999, presented the two reports WHC-99/CONF.209/4 and WHC-99/CONF.209/5 respectively. Concerning the report of the twenty-third session of the Bureau, Mr Janos Jelen (Hungary) said the report reflects the debate of the Bureau and the document can be instrumental for States Parties and the members of the Committee when they prepare themselves for future meetings. Regarding the report of the third extraordinary session of the Committee, the Rapporteur said that he hoped that the report would be scrutinized intensively in the years to come since the deliberations of the Committee set examples for the future. He said that he felt honoured and proud that he could take part in the work of the Committee and the Bureau. With no comments from the members of the Committee the two reports were adopted.

IV.2 The Rapporteur of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau held in Marrakesh, Morocco, from 26 – 27 November 1999, Ms Anne Lammila (Finland), presented the report (WHC-99/CONF.209/6). The Rapporteur said the report was prepared in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre. She paid tribute to the personnel of the Centre and noted that the work of the Centre had become very demanding, and that some changes should be made in the working methods of the Committee. Proposals in this respect were welcome from all Committee members and observers.

IV.3 The following delegates and observers made contributions to the report: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, France, Germany, Hungary, Philippines, Portugal, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, Vietnam, Zimbabwe, ICOMOS and IUCN.

IV.4 The Chairperson reported on his meeting with a representative of the United Nations Foundation, Mr. Nicholas Lapham, and the Director of the World Heritage Centre. The United Nations Foundation was created in January 1998 by Mr Ted Turner to support United Nations activities in the field of environment, improvement of child health, women and the population.

 

IV.5 The Representative informed the Chairperson that the UNF Board of Directors had approved, at the beginning of November 1999, an overall strategy for biodiversity that would primarily focus on natural World Heritage sites inscribed for their biodiversity values (e.g. criterion (iv)). Therefore, the Foundation would contribute over several years to the strengthening and the protection and the management of sites, the first of which are the Galapagos Islands of Ecuador, and the World Heritage sites in Danger in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

IV.6 The UNF Representative also informed of the wish of the Foundation to participate towards the promotion of the Convention to raise awareness of the public and concerned governmental authorities.

IV.7 In reporting on this meeting, the Chairperson emphasized the very positive aspects for the Convention. The UNF Representative would observe the work of the Committee and was available to those members of the Committee who might wish for more detailed information.

IV.8 The Rapporteur thanked delegations that had made contributions and the report was adopted with the proposed amendments.

 

V.REPORT ON THE DECISION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES WITH REGARD TO "WAYS AND MEANS TO ENSURE A REPRESENTATIVE WORLD HERITAGE LIST"

V.1 Mr Isidore Monsi (Benin), Rapporteur of the twelfth session of the General Assembly of the States Party to the World Heritage Convention, presented the report (WHC-99/CONF.209/7) of this session.

V.2 In qualifying the session as "historic", Mr Isidore Monsi, (Benin), reported on the convergence of views relating to the actions proposed in the framework of the Global Strategy and in particular he emphasized the two substantial resolutions unanimously adopted by the States Parties, namely the resolution on "the ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List" and the one relating to an equitable representation within the Committee.

V.3 The Document WHC-99/CONF.209/8 submitted proposals referring to the implementation of the two resolutions that demand close examination by the Committee. Referring in particular to the first resolution, he emphasized that in the opinion of many of the delegates attending the General Assembly, its application should be implicit to a true political will.

V.4 He invited all the partners involved in the implementation of the Global Strategy to arm themselves with this will and thanked the Secretariat for their excellent work and their determination in the spearheading process.

 

 

VI.PROGRESS REPORT ON THE IMPLE-MENTATION OF THE REGIONAL ACTIONS DESCRIBED IN THE GLOBAL STRATEGY ACTION PLAN ADOPTED BY THE COMMITTEE AT ITS TWENTY-SECOND SESSION

VI.1 The Chairperson recalled the reference documents WHC-99/CONF.209.8 and WHC-99/CONF.209/8Add and WHC-99/CONF.209.7, Annex II (text of the resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly on "The ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List"). He indicated that the Document WHC-99/CONF.209/8 was a follow-up to the adoption in 1998 by the Committee at its twenty-second session, of the regional action plans:

(a) Section III presents the report of the activities undertaken in 1999 and the action plans for the years 2001 and 2002 for Africa, the Arab States, Asia, the Pacific, Europe and North America, as well as Latin America and the Caribbean;

(b) Section IV presents the contribution of the advisory bodies to the Global Strategy;

(c) Section V includes a budget for activities for 2000.

VI.2 He added that this document was prepared before the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties and that the conclusions of the debate on "The ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List" were presented in the report of the General Assembly Document WHC-99/CONF.209/7. He indicated that the debate and the resolutions adopted by the General Assembly called for ways of action presented in the Document WHC-99/CONF.209/8Add. which could be examined by the Bureau in June 2000, during its twenty-fourth session.

VI.3 The Secretariat recalled the background to the document and referred to Document WHC-98/CONF.203/12 "Progress Report and Action Plan of Global Strategy for a credible and representative World heritage List", adopted at the twenty-second session of the Committee. This document presents regional analyses as well as six regional action plans for: Africa, Asia, Pacific, the Arab States, Europe and North America, Latin America and the Caribbean. The Secretariat then presented for each region: (a) activities executed in 1999; (b) planned activities for 2000 in the context of the pluriannual regional plans (2000-2002). Each plan also indicated the possibilities for the granting of "international assistance" from the World Heritage Fund to the States Parties. The plans take into account: (i) recognition of imbalance between natural and cultural properties; (ii) characteristics of each region; (iii) under-represented categories; (iv) but also, priorities defined in co-operation with the advisory bodies, States Parties and in synergy with the existing regional networks, notably in Africa, Asia and the Pacific; (v) analyses and recommendations of publications of expert meetings, such as: reports of the Amsterdam meeting, reports of the thematic and Global Strategy meetings in Africa, the Pacific, eastern and central Europe, the Baltic States, in the Andean and the Caribbean regions, and the IUCN thematic studies on the global diversity and geological sites.

VI.4 In the framework of the objectives aiming at the increase in the number of States Parties, awareness-raising of decision-makers, encouragement in the preparation of tentative lists and nominations for inscription, strengthening existing capacities in the field of conservation, activities targeted in the action plans respond to the needs of each region and are based on already identified needs. They will be revised during the years in accordance with the results and in the light of remarks and observations of the Committee. The overall activities take into account the human resources of the Centre responsible for each region.

VI.5 The activities proposed in 2000 in the framework of the action plans, place the emphasis on the: (i) organization of Global Strategy meetings and their follow-up; (ii) organization of thematic meetings on the under-represented categories of heritage and the preparation of publications; (iii) particular attention is given to transborder sites, serial nominations; (iv) utilisation of existing expert networks and strengthening existing capabilities in the field of training; (v) strategic studies under preparation should encourage numerous proposals of mixed and natural sites, especially in Asia and the Pacific.

VI.6 Due to the very heavy workload of the Committee, there was not sufficient time to examine in detail the proposed activities. Nevertheless, the Delegate of Zimbabwe indicated that, at the invitation of his country, the Meeting on Integrity/Authenticity in the African Context, will be held there in May 2000.

VI.7 The Committee noted that concerning the Regional Thematic Expert Meeting on Sacred Mountains in Asia, preliminary discussions were held with the Japanese Authorities to organize the meeting in Japan in the year 2001, and that further information would be provided to the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee.

VI.8 The Observer of Austria informed the Committee that his Government intends to host the Expert Meeting on the European Alps in June 2000 and that this meeting is fully in line with the Global Strategy for a balanced and representative World Heritage List. No natural property has been included from the region on the World Heritage List so far. A constructive discussion has started and draft terms of reference had been prepared. The meeting will identify potential World Heritage sites and will deal with a number of issues including transboundary sites.

VI.9 The Observer of Germany informed the Committee of a proposal of a workshop on "World Heritage Perspectives in the Caucasus Region" suggested to be organized in Georgia in July 2000. This workshop would deal with both the cultural and biological diversity of the region, which is currently under-represented on the World Heritage List. He noted that financial assistance would be required under preparatory assistance.

VI.10 The Delegate of Zimbabwe informed the Committee about a follow-up meeting to the Tiwi meeting that will be held in May 2000 to discuss the authenticity questions in Africa. This meeting will also be supported financially by the Nordic World Heritage Office.

VI.11 The Delegate of Italy, in following-up the proposal from Austria, offered to host an expert meeting on "Cultural landscapes in Europe and the Mediterranean" in February 2000 in Sicily, in collaboration with the administration of the Etna Regional Park. This meeting would address issues raised during the debate on cultural landscapes under the agenda item on nominations.

VI.12 The Delegate of Hungary proposed to organize a meeting on "Natural and Cultural Heritage in Eastern Europe" and suggested a budget proposal to be discussed under Chapter II of the Budget. He also proposed to modify the title of the activity proposed for the Arab States so as the information to be distributed takes into account the needs of the preparation of the periodic report for this region.

VI.13 The Delegate of Australia made a presentation concerning the Asia Pacific Focal Point for World Heritage Managers which had been suggested at the first two meetings of the Regional Network for World Heritage Management in South-East Asia, the Pacific, Australia and New Zealand. Australia launched the Focal Point in July 1999 to share information and experience, develop networks and facilitate training in support of World Heritage conservation in the region. He referred to the Focal Point as an initiative that would contribute to the Global Strategy especially for the Pacific where so few countries had signed the Convention. He gave a brief introduction to the web site for the Focal Point that would include site specific information relevant to the region. He noted that the Focal Point’s work would be performed in partnership with UNESCO, IUCN, ICOMOS, ICCROM, regional States Parties and other organisations.

VI.14 The Committee, having recognized that regional action plans had already contributed in a tangible manner towards the implementation of the Global Strategy, adopted under Chapter II for the Budget for 2000 and amount of US$ 278,000, of which US$ 20,000 for Central and Eastern Europe, and under Thematic Studies US$ 40,000 for ICOMOS and US$ 15,000 for IUCN. It also took note of Information Documents WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.8, WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.11, WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.14 and WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.16.

VI.15 The Director of the Centre referred to Document WHC-99/CONF.209/8Add. that presents the follow-up of the two resolutions adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties (October 1999): (a) "Ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List", and (b) "The equitable representation in the Committee". He proposed that the Centre address a letter to all the representatives of States Parties in Paris as well as to ICOMOS inviting them to a meeting at UNESCO Headquarters in mid-January 2000 to constitute two working groups which would define their mandates, their working methods and their evolution. These groups will submit their reports to the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau in June 2000. The Delegates of Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy and the Observer of France, supported this proposal which was adopted. The Delegate of Greece underlined the legal issues to be discussed by the working group that will deal with the equitable representation of the Committee and suggested that its Chair have legal qualifications.

VI.16 At the end of the session, the Director of the World Heritage Centre indicated that two other groups had been constituted during the twenty-third session of the Committee, namely:

a task force for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, chaired by Ms Christina Cameron (Canada);

a working group which will convene in Canterbury (April 2000), thanks to the generous invitation of the United Kingdom, and will concern a global vision for the revision of the Operational Guidelines.

These two groups shall also present the results of their work to the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau in June 2000.

 

VII.FOLLOW-UP TO THE WORK OF THE CONSULTATIVE BODY OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

VII.1 The Chairperson introduced item 7 and recalled the origin of the creation of this consultative body (twentieth session of the Committee, December 1996, Merida, Mexico). He informed the delegates of the relevant documents and requested the Director of the Centre to present the item.

VII.2 The Director of the Centre took the floor and described the content of the Working Document and summarized the decisions to be taken that he proposed for submission to the Committee. The decision concerning the technical questions, amended by Benin, were adopted as follows:

The Committee requested that the World Heritage Centre and the advisory bodies continue to take into consideration the work of the Consultative Body on technical questions (application of cultural criteria (i) and (vi), examination of authenticity, imbalance of the World Heritage List and the implementation of the Global Strategy) in particular with regard to the implementation of the Global Strategy, the resolution of the General Assembly concerning the ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List, and the meetings on the Rationalisation of Operational Guidelines which should be held in the United Kingdom in April 2000 and the meeting on Integrity/Authenticity in the African context which should be held in Africa in May 2000.

VII.3 Following the adoption of the above, several members of the Committee intervened to request that discussion on this item of the agenda be conducted in a global manner as the different elements submitted for discussion are closely linked. Some delegates requested that a special working group be rapidly formed so that it may submit concrete proposals to this Committee session.

VII.4 Canada, supported by several delegations, of which Belgium – who proposed themes to be studied by this special working group - Australia, France and the United Kingdom suggested that the working group concentrate first of all on the finalisation of the work of the Consultative Body, created in 1996 by the Committee. The Delegate of Canada also proposed that the special working group should not discuss the subject of representativity of the List, which should be studied within the context of the Global Strategy. This proposal was endorsed by the delegates.

VII.5 With regard to the composition of the small working group, delegates indicated that it should be geographically representative of States Parties to the Convention whilst being limited in number. It was also suggested that the advisory bodies to the Convention be represented.

VII.6 At the end of the debate that discussed many aspects of the terms of reference of the working group, the Chairperson of the Committee suggested the following composition of the group that would meet at the end of the plenary session and would submit a draft decision on detailed terms of reference of the future task force to the Committee: Canada (Chairperson), Australia, Belgium, Hungary, Mexico, Morocco, South Africa and Thailand, and the advisory bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM). The Secretariat was provided by the World Heritage Centre. The Committee suggested that the working group should discuss the following items, among others: the working methods of the Committee and its Bureau; proliferation of the statutory meetings; the role of the advisory bodies; the calendar of nominations; the human and financial resources of the World Heritage Centre.

VII.7 These proposals were approved by the Committee and the Chairperson requested that the working group submit its deliberations to the Committee on Thursday, 2 December during the afternoon session. The Chairperson proposed that delegations wishing to contribute to the working group provide their proposals to the Chairperson or their representatives in the Task Force.

VII.8 The working group met twice and formulated a proposal for the terms of reference of the task force. These were submitted to the Committee and, after discussions were amended and approved. During the debate, delegates pointed out the need to keep the composition of the task force open to States Parties wishing to contribute to its work. The approved terms of reference are the following:

TASK FORCE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION

At the request of the World Heritage Committee, a working group chaired by Canada submits to the Committee proposals relating to the composition and terms of reference of a Task Force aimed at improving the implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

Composition of the Task Force:

The same as the working group established by the Committee in Marrakesh 1999, chaired by Canada and including Australia, Belgium, Hungary, Morocco, Mexico, South Africa, Thailand, and the advisory bodies (ICOMOS, ICCROM and IUCN) and a representative of the World Heritage Centre. Australia agreed to act as rapporteur.

Terms of reference of the Task Force:

To identify and propose for consideration of the Bureau in June 2000 priority practical measures for more effective operation of the Convention, taking account of pressures affecting the Convention over the coming years. Those measures, some of which should be applicable in preparation of and during the Committee meeting of December 2000, will focus on:

• The organization and running of the statutory meetings,

• The procedures for decision making,

• The information and documentation management,

• The Operational Guidelines.

The Task Force will take into account and further build upon all discussions in previous General Assembly, Committee and Bureau meetings (see WHC-99/CONF.209/9), the management review and financial audit, and proposals made by State Parties.

Working methods:

The Task Force will operate in a way that maximizes the opportunity for State Party input. A concise draft paper will be circulated by March 2000 and comments will be sought by fax and email. The draft paper will be posted on the UNESCO homepage.

Possible further developments:

After having considered the proposals of the Task Force, the Bureau, at its meeting of June 2000, will recommend for Committee consideration a possible new working group to reflect in depth on the objectives and fundamental priorities in implementing the Convention.

 

VIII.INFORMATION ON TENTATIVE LISTS AND EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND WORLD HERITAGE LIST

The Chairperson indicated that all the cultural nominations for inscription are included in the tentative lists of the countries concerned.

EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER

VIII.1 Following the review of the state of conservation reports and at the recommendation of the Bureau, the Committee decided to inscribe the following natural and cultural properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

• Salonga National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo)

• Rwenzori Mountains National Park (Uganda)

• Iguaçu National Park (Brazil)

• Hampi (India)

VIII.2 The Committee did not recommend the deletion of properties from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

VIII.3 The Committee approved the change of the name of the following property included on the World Heritage List:

"Sokkuram Grotto" to "Sokkuram Grotto and Pulguksa Temple" (Republic of Korea)

Concerning the request from Germany, that "Roman Monuments, Cathedral and Liebfrauen-Church in Trier" is changed to "Roman Monuments, Cathedral Saint Peter and St. Mary’s Church in Trier", the Chairperson suggested consultations between the Centre and the State Party to define the correct English version.

A.NATURAL HERITAGE

A.1Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

 

Property	Península Valdés
Id. N°	937
State Party	Argentina
Criteria	N (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe Peninsula Valdés on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv).

Peninsula Valdés contains very important and significant natural habitats for the in-situ conservation of several threatened species of outstanding universal value, and specifically its globally important concentration of breeding southern right whales, which is an endangered species. It is also important because of the breeding populations of southern elephant seals and southern sea lions. The area exhibits an exceptional example of adaptation of hunting techniques by the orca to the local coastal conditions.

The Committee commended the government of the Province of Chubut for promoting the preparation of an Integrated Collaborative Management Plan for this site. The Committee recommended that the State Party, along with responsible regional and local bodies should: (a) ensure that effective controls are in place over any possible pollution threat from the town of Puerto Madryn to the waters of Golfo Nuevo, (b) support the efforts of the relevant authorities to secure the equipment needed to respond quickly to any oil hazard from passing shipping so as to protect the marine conservation values of the area; (c) produce a tourism management plan as an integral element of the overall management plan; (d) encourage implementation of the Integrated Collaborative Management Plan, and in particular to ensure that farmers and other private owners of land can play a full part in the development of environmentally responsible tourism; and (e) work at the international level to ensure that the marine mammals concerned are protected throughout their range.

  

Property	Discovery Coast Atlantic Forest Reserves
Id. N°	892Rev
State Party	Brazil
Criteria	N (ii) (iv)

IUCN informed the Committee that the evaluation of this property has been undertaken based on the revised nomination submitted by the State Party in April 1999.

The Brazilian Discovery Coast includes eight separate protected areas containing the best and largest remaining examples of Atlantic forest in the Northeast region of Brazil and contains high numbers of rare and endemic species. The site displays the biological richness and evolutionary history of the few remaining areas of Atlantic forest of Northeast Brazil. The site reveals a pattern of evolution of great interest to science and importance for conservation. The fact that only these few scattered remnants of a once vast forest remain, make them an irreplaceable part of the world’s forest heritage.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criteria (ii) and (iv). It also recommended that the State Party should be encouraged to complete the "Plan of Action for the Atlantic Forest Region" and other initiatives indicated in the IUCN evaluation.

  

Property	Atlantic Forest Southeast Reserves
Id. N°	893-894Rev
State Party	Brazil
Criteria	N(ii) (iii) (iv)

IUCN informed the Committee that the evaluation of this property has been undertaken based on the revised nomination submitted by the State Party in April 1999.

The Atlantic Forest Southeast Reserves contain the best and largest remaining examples of Atlantic forest in the Southeast region of Brazil. The 25 protected areas that make up the site display the biological richness and evolutionary history of the few remaining areas of Atlantic forest of Southeast Brazil. The area is also exceptionally diverse with high numbers of rare and endemic species. With its "mountains to the sea" attitudinal gradient, its estuary, wild rivers, karst and numerous waterfalls, the site also has exceptional scenic values.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv). It also recommended that the State Party should be encouraged to restore natural conditions in the Serra do Mar State Park, which potentially could be incorporated in the site.

The Delegate of Morocco noted the values of the site but highlighted the challenges of the management of serial sites. The Delegate of Australia noted that management in serial sites is complex but can be done with careful strategic planning and an appropriate legal framework.

  

Property	Miguasha Park
Id. N°	686Rev
State Party	Canada
Criteria	N(i)

In its representation of vertebrate life, Miguasha Park is the most outstanding fossil site in the world for illustrating the Devonian as the "Age of Fishes". The area is of paramount importance in having the greatest number and best preserved fossil specimens found anywhere in the world of the lobe-finned fishes that gave rise to the first four-legged, air-breathing terrestrial vertebrates - the tetrapodes.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criterion (i). The Committee commended the Government of Canada for the rigorous comparative assessment applied to this nomination and noted it as a model for future fossil nominations. Following an intervention of the Delegate of Thailand, IUCN highlighted the results of the comparative study on Devonian sites and elaborated on how this site addresses criterion (i).

  

Property	Area de Conservacion Guanacaste
Id. N°	928
State Party	Costa Rica
Criteria	N (ii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe the Guanacaste Conservation Area on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv).

The site demonstrates significant, major biological and ecological processes in both its terrestrial and marine-coastal environments, as exemplified by: a) evolution, succession and restoration of Pacific Tropical Dry Forest; b) altitudinal migration and other interactive biogeographic and ecological processes along its dry forest - montane humid forest - cloud forest - lowland Caribbean rain forest transect; and, c) the major upwelling and development of coral colonies and reefs in regions long considered to not have either (the marine area near the coast of the Murcielago sector of Santa Rosa National Park).

The site contains important natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity (2.4% of global diversity), including both the best dry forest habitats and communities in Central America and key habitat for threatened animal species such as the Saltwater Crocodile, False Vampire Bat, Leatherback Sea Turtle, Jaguar, Jabiru Stork, Mangrove Hummingbird and threatened plant species such as Mahogany, Guyacan Real (Lignum Vitae), five species each of rare cacti and rare bromeliads.

  

Property	Desembarco del Granma National Park
Id. N°	889
State Party	Cuba
Criteria	N (i) (iii)

The uplifted marine terraces of the Desembarco del Granma National Park and associated ongoing development of karst topography and features, represent a globally significant example of geomorphologic and physiographic features and ongoing geological processes. The area includes spectacular stair-step terraces and cliffs and the ecosystems that have evolved on them, as well as some of the most pristine and impressive coastal cliffs bordering the Western Atlantic between the Canadian Maritimes and southern South America.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criteria (i) and (iii). It also commended the Government of Cuba for the efforts to conserve this site. The Committee suggested that the State Party submit a request to the World Heritage Fund for technical assistance to produce a tourism management plan as an integral element of the overall management plan for this site.

  

Property	Lorentz National Park
Id. N°	955
State Party	Indonesia
Criteria	N (i) (ii) (iv)

The Committee recalled that the Bureau at its twenty-third session requested the Centre to inform the Indonesian authorities of a number of aspects suggested by IUCN dealing with the management of the site, and in particular: (a) the priority need to continue the process of management planning for the Park with full involvement of the local stakeholders; (b) encouragement for the proposed establishment of a Foundation which would assist in the management of the Park; (c) possible twinning arrangement with the Wet Tropics World Heritage site in Australia; (d) appointment of a Park Director and support staff; (e) the concern over development projects that would affect the Park, for example the proposed Timika/Mapurajaya road and any expansion of mining activity towards the Park boundary so as not to conflict with Lorentz National Park’s nomination as a World Heritage site. A letter from the Indonesian authorities was received noting their agreement with all of the above.

Several delegates and observers noted the issues of the mining concessions surrounding the site, the proposed 6% reduction of the site and the adjacent oil concessions as well as other potential impacts to the sites, such as road construction and visual impacts.

The Chairperson, in thanking the Committee for the extensive debate and consideration of the matter, suggested that the following points be transmitted to the State Party :

1. The Committee noted that as per the request of 25 October 1999 from the Indonesian authorities, an adjustment of approximately 150,000 hectares were made to exclude oil exploration concessions in the south-east corner of the Park. The Committee accepted this reduction in the size of the property and agreed with the new boundaries as submitted in Map C (see Annex V). The modified size of the site is now about 2.35 million hectares.
2. The Committee recognized the potential risks and threats as indicated in the IUCN evaluation and requested the State Party to consider these in actions concerning the site.
3. The Committee encouraged further action on the proposed Trust Fund that would assist in strengthening conservation in Lorentz National Park.
4. The Committee requested that a monitoring mission be undertaken to gauge progress three years after inscription.

The Delegate of Australia noted that his country still has not been officially informed about the suggestion of twinning arrangements between the Wet Tropics of Queensland and Lorentz National Park, but will be willing to co-operate if invited by the State Party.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criteria (i), (ii) and (iv).

The site is the largest protected area in Southeast Asia (2.35 mil. ha.) and the only protected area in the world which incorporates a continuous, intact transect from snow cap to tropical marine environment, including extensive lowland wetlands. Located at the meeting point of two colliding continental plates, the area has a complex geology with on-going mountain formation as well as major sculpting by glaciation and shoreline accretion which has formed much of the lowland areas. These processes have led to a high level of endemism and the area supports the highest level of biodiversity in the region. The area also contains fossil sites that record the evolution of life on New Guinea.

  

Property	Puerto-Princesa Subterranean River National Park
Id. N°	652Rev
State Party	Philippines
Criteria	N (iii) (iv)

The Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park features a spectacular limestone karst landscape with its underground river. A distinguishing feature of the river is that it flows directly into the sea, and the lower portion of the river is subject to tidal influences. The area also represents a significant habitat for biodiversity conservation. The site contains a full mountain to the sea ecosystem and protects forests, which are among the most significant in Asia.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site under natural criteria (iii) and (iv). It also commended the Government of the Philippines for the consultative process undertaken with relevant authorities, specially with the affected Barangays and for their approaches to integrated regional land use planning which aim to ensure that the World Heritage values of the site are maintained.

The Observer of the Philippines informed the Committee that a tourism development plan would be provided shortly.

  

Property	The Laurisilva of Madeira
Id. N°	934
State Party	Portugal
Criteria	N (ii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe the Laurel Forest of Madeira on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (ii) and (iv).

The site contains the largest surviving relict of the virtually extinct laurisilva forest type that was once widespread in Europe. This forest type is considered to be a centre of plant diversity containing numerous rare, relict and endemic species, especially of bryophytes, ferns and flowering plants. It also has a very rich invertebrate fauna. Endemic species include the Madeiran long-toed pigeon and some 66 species of vascular plants.

The Committee decided to: (a) commend the State Party on the protection afforded to the forest in a protected area less than 10 years old and on the commitment shown by the Autonomous Regional Government, (b) encourage the State Party to enhance interpretation of the area and envisage compatible forestry practices outside the site, (c) encourage discussions between the Portuguese and the Spanish authorities on the possibility of jointly proposing Garajonay National Park World Heritage site and the Laurel Forest of Madeira as a single World Heritage site representing laurel forest.

The Observer of Spain stated that his Government would agree to the suggestion concerning discussions in relation to a joint site of Garajonay National Park and the Laurel Forest of Madeira.

  

Property	Western Caucasus
Id. N°	900
State Party	Russian Federation
Criteria	N (ii) (iv)

The Western Caucasus has a remarkable diversity of geology, ecosystems and species. It is of global significance as a centre of plant diversity. Along with the Virgin Komi World Heritage site, it is the only large mountain area in Europe that has not experienced significant human impact, containing extensive tracts of undisturbed mountain forests unique on the European scale.

The twenty-third session of the Bureau could not study this nomination because the requested field mission was delayed for climatic reasons, and thus there was no report for the nominated site. The twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau decided to refer this nomination to the Committee, as proposed by the Delegate of Hungary, the original proposal of IUCN having been to defer this property.

The Delegate of Thailand underlined paragraph 65 of the Operational Guidelines and stated that this nomination was the case for deferral and could not be amended to referral because the conditions for deferral and referral were specifically provided for by the Operational Guidelines. Also, the nomination could not be considered by this session of the Committee. He registered his dissent with the decision of the Committee.

The Observer of the United Kingdom pointed out that this nomination was a specific case and could not be considered as a precedent. The Delegate of Belgium underlined that the site had not been reviewed by the twenty-third session of the Bureau as the mission had been delayed for climatic reasons.

The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv): The site includes: The territory of the Caucasus State Biosphere Reserve (CSBR) with the exception of the Khosta Yew-Box Grove but including the entire Lagonaki plateau. IUCN noted that previous concerns relating to the integrated management of this area and the status of the Lagonaki-Dragomys road had been adequately addressed by the State Party. IUCN recommended that the State Party elaborate a master management plan for all the protected areas included in the nomination.

The Observer of the Russian Federation, in thanking the Committee, stated that nature conservation is being taken into account in the protection of this property and all future measures for its extension. He noted the interest of the State Committee for the Environment in the enlargement of the territory of the nomination by means of incorporation of the strict conservation zone of the Sochi National Park in the near future.

  

Property	Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park
Id. N°	914
State Party	South Africa
Criteria	N (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv).

The St. Lucia site consists of thirteen contiguous protected areas with a total size of 234,566 hectares. The site is the largest estuarine system in Africa and includes the southernmost extension of coral reefs on the continent. The site contains a combination of on-going fluvial, marine and aeolian processes that have resulted in a variety of landforms and ecosystems. Features include wide submarine canyons, sandy beaches, forested dune cordon and a mosaic of wetlands, grasslands, forests, lakes and savanna. The variety of morphology as well as major flood and storm events contribute to ongoing evolutionary processes in the area. Natural phenomena include: shifts from low to hyper-saline states in the Park’s lakes; large numbers of nesting turtles on the beaches; the migration of whales, dolphins and whale-sharks off-shore; and huge numbers of waterfowl including large breeding colonies of pelicans, storks, herons and terns. The Park’s location between sub-tropical and tropical Africa as well as its coastal setting has resulted in exceptional biodiversity including some 521 bird species.

The Committee commended the Government of South Africa on three issues: (a) for the decision to ban sand mining in the area and to subsequently nominate the area for World Heritage; (b) the long history of conservation in the area and the professional work of the Kwazlulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service in maintaining the site; (c) the launch of the Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative with the neighbouring countries of Swaziland and Mozambique which provides the regional conservation and development framework for the Greater St. Lucia Area and which will further strengthen community conservation work there.

The Committee noted the possible extensions of the Greater St. Lucia including a possible future transfrontier site with Mozambique. It urged the completion of the land claim negotiations and confirmed that World Heritage site designation should not prejudice this process.

The Observer of France highlighted that this is the first nomination from South Africa and that the Committee’s decision to inscribe it is fully in line with the Global Strategy. The Delegate of South Africa thanked the Committee on behalf of the people of South Africa for the inscription of its first site on the World Heritage List.

 

A.2 Extension of a natural property which was not inscribed on the World Heritage List

Property	Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest – Extension
Id. N°	33-627 Bis
State Party	Belarus / Poland

The Committee recalled that IUCN informed the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau that the proposed extension would provide an important contribution to the biodiversity of the Polish part of the existing World Heritage site, in particular through the oligothrophic pinewoods. However, they are not significant for the existing World Heritage site as a whole.

The Committee decided not to include the extension into the existing World Heritage site.

The Committee commended the Polish Government for its initiative for expanding the existing National Park and to give legal protection to the whole unit.

 

B.MIXED PROPERTIES

VIII.4 The Committee noted that the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau had noted that the Government of Australia provided the Centre with complementary information concerning the mixed cultural and natural nomination of the Greater Blue Mountains Area (Australia) on 7 October 1999. The State Party has commenced preparation of additional detailed complementary material addressing issues raised by the Bureau at its twenty-third ordinary session in July 1999. The Bureau had recommended deferral for the natural part of the nomination and did not recommend inscription according to cultural values. The State Party has informed the Centre of its intention to submit new information by 30 January 2000 to enable the Bureau to fully consider the nomination at its twenty-fourth session in Paris in June/July 2000, and to prepare recommendations for the World Heritage Committee’s twenty-fourth session in November 2000. Both ICOMOS and IUCN have agreed to this suggested timetable.

VIII.5 Concerning the site of the Aeolian Islands (Italy), the Committee noted that the Bureau at its extraordinary session had deferred the site. The Delegate of Italy informed the Committee that there had been a misunderstanding in the information provided, and that management plans and regulations for the site exist. Several delegates highlighted procedural matters in particular paragraph 65 of the Operational Guidelines, and stated that deferred sites are not presented for consideration by the Committee. Other delegates underlined the sovereignty of the Committee in its decisions. Following a considerable debate, the Delegate of Italy withdrew the request to discuss the site at this session. The Chairperson thanked the Committee for the debate and expressed his wish to avoid lengthy legal debates. He noted that Italy and IUCN will clarify the management issues and concluded that the site will be presented to the twenty-fourth Bureau session.

 

B.1 Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

 

Property	Mount Wuyi
Id. N°	911
State Party	China
Criteria	N (iii) (iv) / C(iii) (vi)

The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (iii) and (iv) and cultural criteria (iii) and (vi).

Natural criteria (iii) and (iv) :

Mount Wuyi is one of the most outstanding subtropical forests in the world. It is the largest, most representative example of a largely intact forest encompassing the diversity of the Chinese Subtropical Forest and the South Chinese Rainforest. It acts as a refuge for a large number of ancient, relict plant species, many of them endemic to China and contains large numbers of reptile, amphibian and insect species. The riverine landscape of Nine-Bend Stream (lower gorge) is also of exceptional scenic quality in its juxtaposition of smooth rock cliffs with clear, deep water.

Cultural criteria (iii) and (vi) :

Criterion (iii): Mount Wuyi is a landscape of great beauty that has been protected for more than twelve centuries. It contains a series of exceptional archaeological sites, including the Han City established in the 1st century BC and a number of temples and study centres associated with the birth of Neo-Confucianism in the 11th century AD.

Criterion (vi): Mount Wuyi was the cradle of Neo-Confucianism, a doctrine that played a dominant role in the countries of Eastern and South-Eastern Asia for many centuries and influenced philosophy and government over much of the world.

  

Property	Ibiza, Biodiversity and Culture
Id. N°	417Rev
State Party	Spain
Criteria	N(ii)(iv) / C(ii)(iii)(iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the basis of natural criteria (ii) and (iv) and cultural criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv).

Natural criteria (ii) and (iv) :

The marine component of this site is characterised by the presence of dense and very well preserved prairies of oceanic Posidonia (seagrass) and coral reefs. Oceanic Posidonia only occurs in the Mediterranean basin and this site is the best preserved example within this region. The area also contains the most diverse community of Cladocora caespitosa, supporting 220 species, in the Mediterranean basin and habitat for three globally endangered species, including the Monk Seal. The area also contains an important community of Ecteinascidia turbinata, a marine species with recognised value to prevent and combat different types of cancer. Parts of the site are included in the List of Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) for migratory birds.

The Committee noted that since the twenty-third session of the Bureau, IUCN was informed about an EC-funded proposal to modify the port of Ibiza. IUCN has reviewed the EIA for this project and noted that it will not impact on the natural values of the site.

Cultural criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The intact 16th century fortifications of Ibiza bear unique witness to the military architecture and engineering and the aesthetics of the Renaissance. This Italian-Spanish model was very influential, especially in the construction and fortification of towns in the New World.

Criterion (iii): The Phoenician ruins of Sa Caleta and the Phoenician-Punic cemetery of Puig des Molins are exceptional evidence of urbanization and social life in the Phoenician colonies of the western Mediterranean. They constitute a unique resource, in terms of volume and importance, of material from the Phoenician and Carthaginian tombs.

Criterion (iv): The Upper Town of Ibiza is an excellent example of a fortified acropolis which preserves in an exceptional way in its walls and in its urban fabric successive imprints of the earliest Phoenician settlements and the Arab and Catalan periods through to the Renaissance bastions. The long process of building the defensive walls has not destroyed the earlier phases or the street pattern, but has incorporated them in the ultimate phase.

Several delegates and observers commended the State Party for this nomination and reminded it about the great challenges that growing tourism will pose to the protection of the site.

 

B.2Extension of a mixed property inscribed on the World Heritage List

 

Property	Pyrénées – Mont Perdu
Id. N°	773 Bis
State Party	France / Spain
Criteria

The Committee noted the comment by ICOMOS that the small extension proposed by France is a valuable contribution to the overall cultural landscape. IUCN informed the Bureau that the existing Pyrénées – Mount Perdu (France/Spain) World Heritage site was inscribed under natural criteria (i) and (iii). The proposed extension would not meet any natural criteria on its own. However, the extension has comparable scenic and geomorphological values to the existing site. IUCN noted concerns as to whether the legal basis is sufficient for long term protection, as indicated in the original IUCN evaluation. IUCN noted that the value of the area lies in its significance as a cultural landscape.

The Committee decided to extend the existing World Heritage site to include the area of 550 ha (1,8 % of the World Heritage area) in the upper Valley of Héas.

 

C.CULTURAL HERITAGE

VIII.6 The Committee noted that Germany, following the twenty-third session of the Bureau, had withdrawn the nomination of The Cathedral of St-Maurice and St-Catherine, Magdebourg (Germany).

C.1Properties that the Committee inscribed on the World Heritage List

 

Property	Cueva de las Manos, Río Pinturas
Id. N°	936
State Party	Argentina
Criteria	C (iii)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iii):

Criterion (iii): Cueva de las Manos contains an outstanding collection of prehistoric rock art which bears witness to the culture of the earliest human societies in South America.

  

Property	City of Graz – Historic Centre
Id. N°	931
State Party	Austria
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The Historic Centre of the City of Graz reflects artistic and architectural movements originating from the Germanic region, the Balkans, and the Mediterranean, for which it served as a crossroads for centuries. The greatest architects and artists of these different regions expressed themselves forcefully here and thus created brilliant syntheses.

Criterion (iv): The urban complex forming the Historic Centre of the City of Graz is an exceptional example of a harmonious integration of architectural styles from successive periods. Each age is represented by typical buildings, which are often masterpieces. The urban physiognomy faithfully tells the story of its historic development.

  

Property	The Belfries of Flanders and Wallonia
Id. N°	943
State Party	Belgium
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The belfries of Belgium are exceptional examples of a form of urban architecture adapted to the political and spiritual requirements of their age.

Criterion (iv): The Middle Ages saw the emergence of towns that were independent of the prevalent feudal system. The belfries in the historic County of Flanders and in Wallonia symbolize this new-found independence, and also the links within them between the secular and religious powers.

The Committee noted that this serial inscription was of particular interest as the monuments are located in different cities and regions of the State Party.

  

Property	Historic Centre of the Town of Diamantina
Id. N°	890
State Party	Brazil
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): Diamantina shows how explorers of the Brazilian territory, diamond prospectors, and representatives of the Crown were able to adapt European models to an American context in the 18th century, thus creating a culture that was faithful to its roots yet completely original.

Criterion (iv): The urban and architectural group of Diamantina, perfectly integrated into a wild landscape, is a fine example of an adventurous spirit combined with a quest for refinement so typical of human nature.

The Observer of Brazil and the Mayor of Diamantina expressed their warm appreciation for this inscription.

  

Property	The Dazu Rock Carvings
Id. N°	912
State Party	China
Criteria	C (i) (ii) (iii)

The Committee inscribed this site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii) and (iii):

Criterion (i): The Dazu Carvings represent the pinnacle of Chinese rock art for their high aesthetic quality and their diversity of style and subject matter.

Criterion (ii): Tantric Buddhism from India and the Chinese Taoist and Confucian beliefs came together at Dazu to create a highly original and influential manifestation of spiritual harmony.

Criterion (iii): The eclectic nature of religious belief in later Imperial China is given material expression in the exceptional artistic heritage of the Dazu rock art.

The State Party agreed to the recommendation that the site be named "The Dazu Rock Carvings". The Committee, noting that the Dazu area was included in a large World Bank planning scheme, recommended the State Party to keep the Committee and ICOMOS fully informed on the nature and progress of the projects to mitigate any adverse impact on the Dazu rock carvings and their settings.

  

Property	Viñales Valley
Id. N°	840 Rev
State Party	Cuba
Criteria	C(iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):

Criterion (iv): The Viñales Valley is an outstanding karst landscape in which traditional methods of agriculture (notably tobacco growing) have survived unchanged for several centuries. The region also preserves a rich vernacular tradition in its architecture, its crafts, and its music.

The Committee noted that during the recent UNESCO General Conference, the Valley of Viñales was awarded the Melina Mercouri Prize for Cultural Landscapes by the Director-General of UNESCO.

  

Property	Litomyšl Castle
Id. N°	901
State Party	Czech Republic
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): Litomyšl Castle is an outstanding and immaculately preserved example of the arcade castle, a type of building first developed in Italy and modified in the Czech lands to create an evolved form of special architectural quality.

Criterion (iv): Litomyšl Castle illustrates in an exceptional way the aristocratic residences of Central Europe in the Renaissance and their subsequent development under the influence of new artistic movements.

  

Property	Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Rios de Cuenca
Id. N°	863
State Party	Ecuador
Criteria	C (ii) (iv) (v)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv) and (v).

Criterion (ii): Cuenca illustrates the successful implantation of the principles of Renaissance urban planning in the Americas.

Criterion (iv): The successful fusion of different societies and cultures in Latin America is vividly symbolized by the layout and townscape of Cuenca.

Criterion (v): Cuenca is an outstanding example of a planned inland Spanish colonial city.

  

Property	The Bronze Age Burial Site of Sammallahdenmäki
Id. N°	579 Rev
State Party	Finland
Criteria	C (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):

Criterion (iii): The Sammallahdenmäki cairn cemetery bears exceptional witness to the society of the Bronze Age of Scandinavia.

Criterion (iv): The Sammallahdenmäki cemetery is an outstanding example of Bronze Age funerary practices in Scandinavia.

Delegates drew the attention that the inscription of this non-monumental property responds to the objectives of the global strategy.

  

Property	The Jurisdiction of Saint-Emilion
Id. N°	932
State Party	France
Criteria	C (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):

Criterion (iii): The Ancient Jurisdiction of Saint-Emilion is an outstanding example of an historic vineyard landscape that has survived intact and in activity to the present day.

Criterion (iv): The intensive cultivation of grapes for wine production in a precisely defined region and the resulting landscape is illustrated in an exceptional way by the historic Jurisdiction of Saint-Emilion.

The Committee expressed its appreciation for this nomination as it represents the cultural landscape typology introduced in 1992, in which the natural environment had been transformed to a landscape of monumental value.

  

Property	Museumsinsel (Museum Island), Berlin
Id. N°	896
State Party	Germany
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv). 

Criterion (ii): The Berlin Museumsinsel is an unique ensemble of museum buildings, which illustrated the evolution of modern museum design over more than a century.

Criterion (iv): The art museum is a social phenomenon that owes its origins to the Age of Enlightenment and its extension to all people to the French Revolution. The Museumsinsel is the most outstanding example of this concept given material from and a symbolic central urban setting.

The Observer of Poland emphasized that in this type of properties it was essential to maintain not only the values of the monumental buildings, but also to maintain the integrity of the museum collections.

  

Property	Wartburg Castle
Id. N°	897
State Party	Germany
Criteria	C (iii) (vi)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (vi):

Criterion (iii): The Castle of Wartburg is an outstanding monument of the feudal period in Central Europe.

Criterion (vi): The Castle of Wartburg is rich in cultural associations, most notably its role as the place of exile of Martin Luther, who composed his German translation of the New Testament there. It is also a powerful symbol of German integration and unity.

The Observer of Poland pointed out that this inscription recognized the value of the restorations of the nineteenth century and the Observer of the Holy See stressed the importance of the Wartburg Castle for history and Christian spirituality (St. Elizabeth of Thuringen).

  

Property	The Archaeological Sites of Mycenae and Tiryns
Id. N°	941
State Party	Greece
Criteria	C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i),( ii), (iii),( iv) and (vi):

Criterion (i): The architecture and design Mycenae and Tiryns, such as the Lion Gate and the Treasury of Atreus and the walls of Tiryns, are outstanding examples of human creative genius.

Criterion (ii): The Mycenaean civilisation, as exemplified by Mycenae and Tiryns, had a profound effect on the development of classical Greek architecture and urban design, and consequently also on contemporary cultural forms.

Criterion (iii) and (iv): Mycenae and Tiryns represent the apogee of the Mycenaean civilization, which laid the foundations for the evolution of later European cultures.

Criterion (vi): Mycenae and Tiryns are indissolubly linked with the Homeric epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey, the influence of which upon European literature and the arts has been profound for more than three millennia.

  

Property	The Historic Centre (Chorá) with the Monastery of Saint-John the Theologian and the Cave of the Apocalypse on the Island of Pátmos
Id. N°	942
State Party	Greece
Criteria	C (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv) and (vi):

Criterion (iii): The town of Chorá on the Island of Pátmos is one of the few settlements in Greece that have evolved uninterruptedly since the 12^th century. There are few other places in the world where religious ceremonies that date back to the early Christian times are still being practised unchanged.

Criterion (iv): The Monastery of Hagios Ioannis Theologos (Saint John the Theologian) and the Cave of the Apocalypse on the Island of Pátmos, together with the associated medieval settlement of Chorá, constitute an exceptional example of a traditional Greek Orthodox pilgrimage centre of outstanding architectural interest.

Criterion (vi): The Monastery of Hagios Ioannis Theologos and the Cave of the Apocalypse commemorate the site where St John the Theologian (Divine), the "Beloved Disciple", composed two of the most sacred Christian works, his Gospel and the Apocalypse.

The Delegate of Thailand raised the question of eligibility of criterion (vi). He thought that the criterion (iii) should be applied. This recommendation was also endorsed by ICOMOS and the Committee. Delegates and observers commended the high values of the site and decided to keep the criterion (vi).

  

Property	Hortobágy National Park
Id. N°	474 Rev
State Party	Hungary
Criteria	C (iv) (v)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iv) and (v):

Criterion (iv): The Hungarian Puszta is an exceptional surviving example of a cultural landscape constituted by a pastoral society.

Criterion (v): The landscape of the Hortobágy National Park maintains intact and visible traces of its traditional land-use forms over several thousand years, and illustrates the harmonious interaction between people and nature.

  

Property	Darjeeling Himalayan Railway
Id. N°	944
State Party	India
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The Darjeeling Himalayan Railway is an outstanding example of the influence of an innovative transportation system on the social and economic development of a multi-cultural region, which was to serve as a model for similar developments in many parts of the world.

Criterion (iv): The development of railways in the 19^th century has a profound influence on social and economic developments in many parts of the world. This process is illustrated in an exceptional and seminal fashion by the Darjeeling Himalayan Railway.

The Committee drew the attention of the State Party to the recommendations of ICOMOS concerning a) the creation of a heritage conservation unit; b) the establishment of a buffer zone along the length of the railway line and the station and c) the establishment of an adapted management plan. All these issues could be examined by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth session in 2001.

The Observer of Germany underlined the importance of retaining the steam trains within the site. The Committee was assured by both ICOMOS and the Observer of India that, despite the movable character of the steam trains, they would most certainly remain in use due to their importance as a tourism attraction. The Observer of India, in thanking the Committee for its decision, drew the attention of the Committee to the importance of preserving this unique site, which was the first industrial heritage site in Asia to be inscribed on the World Heritage List.

  

Property	Villa Adriana (Tivoli)
Id. N°	907
State Party	Italy
Criteria	C (i) (ii) (iii)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i),( ii) and( iii):

Criteria (i) and (iii): The Villa Adriana is a masterpiece that uniquely brings together the highest expressions of the material cultures of the ancient Mediterranean world.

Criterion (ii): Study of the monuments that make up the Villa Adriana played a crucial role in the rediscovery of the elements of classical architecture by the architects of the Renaissance and the Baroque period. It also profoundly influenced many 19th and 20th century architects and designers.

  

Property	Shrines and Temples of Nikko
Id. N°	913
State Party	Japan
Criteria	C (i) (iv) (vi)

The Committee inscribed this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (iv) and (vi):

Criterion (i): The Nikko shrines and temples are a reflection of architectural and artistic genius; this aspect is reinforced by the harmonious integration of the buildings in a forest and a natural site laid out by people.

Criterion (iv): Nikko is a perfect illustration of the architectural style of the Edo period as applied to Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples. The Gongen-zukuri style of the two mausoleums, the Tôshôgû and the Taiyû-in Reibyô, reached the peak of its expression in Nikko, and was later to exert a decisive influence. The ingenuity and creativity of its architects and decorators are revealed in an outstanding and distinguished manner.

Criterion (vi): The Nikko shrines and temples, together with their environment, are an outstanding example of a traditional Japanese religious centre, associated with the Shinto perception of the relationship of man with nature, in which mountains and forests have a sacred meaning and are objects of veneration, in a religious practice that is still very much alive today.

The Committee took note of the comments of ICOMOS that the development pressure near the south-west border of the site would require the State Party to be vigilant in monitoring potential threats in the future.

  

Property	Historic Fortified Town of Campeche
Id. N°	895
State Party	Mexico
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The harbour town of Campeche is an urbanization model of a Baroque colonial town, with its checkerboard street plan; the defensive walls surrounding its historic centre reflect the influence of the military architecture in the Caribbean.

Criterion (iv): The fortifications system of Campeche, an eminent example of the military architecture of the 17th and 18th centuries, is part of an overall defensive system set up by the Spanish to protect the ports on the Caribbean Sea from pirate attacks.

At the initiative of ICOMOS and with the agreement of the States Party the title of the property was changed to the Historic Fortified Town of Campeche.

  

Property	The Archaeological Monuments Zone of Xochicalco
Id. N°	939
State Party	Mexico
Criteria	C (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):

Criterion (iii): Xochicalco is an exceptionally well preserved and complete example of a fortified settlement from the Epiclassic Period of Mesoamerica.

Criterion (iv): The architecture and art of Xochicalco represent the fusion of cultural elements from different parts of Mesoamerica, at a period when the breakdown of earlier political structures resulted in intensive cultural regrouping.

The Committee recommended that the State Party take note of the recommendation to upgrade visitor facilities, security and management planning.

 

  

Property	Droogmakerij de Beemster (Beemster Polder)
Id. N°	899
State Party	Netherlands
Criteria	C (i) (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), and (iv):

Criterion (i): The Beemster Polder is a masterpiece of creative planning, in which the ideals of antiquity and the Renaissance were applied to the design of a reclaimed landscape.

Criterion (ii): The innovative and intellectually imaginative landscape of the Beemster Polder had a profound and lasting impact on reclamation projects in Europe and beyond.

Criterion (iv): The creation of the Beemster Polder marks a major step forward in the interrelationship between humankind and water at a crucial period of social and economic expansion.

Referring to the particular character of the nominations of the Netherlands, the Observer of the Netherlands informed the Committee that very recently the parliament of the Netherlands had accepted a policy document on the integration of cultural heritage – archaeology, built heritage and cultural landscapes - in national, provincial and local planning policies. World Heritage preservation is explicitly incorporated in this document. The Netherlands would be pleased to share this kind of experience with other States Parties.

 

 

Property	Sukur Cultural Landscape
Id. N°	938
State Party	Nigeria
Criteria	C (iii) (v) (vi)

The Committee inscribed the property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (v) and (vi):

Criterion (iii): Sukur is an exceptional landscape that graphically illustrates a form of land-use that marks a critical stage in human settlement and its relationship with its environment

Criterion (v): The cultural landscape of Sukur has survived unchanged for many centuries, and continues to do so at a period when this form of traditional human settlement is under threat in many parts of the world.

Criterion (vi): The cultural landscape of Sukur is eloquent testimony to a strong and continuing spiritual and cultural tradition that has endured for many centuries.

Several members of the Committee expressed their pleasure and emotion following the inscription of this cultural landscape on the World Heritage List as it reflects international recognition of African heritage and is of significant importance in achieving the goals of the Global Strategy.

The Chairperson, in the name of the Committee, congratulated Nigeria and expressed the wish that, in the near future, nominations for inscription from the biggest state in Africa that bear witness to its richness, its cultural diversity, and illustrate the specificity of African heritage would be submitted for inscription.

H.E. the Federal Minister for Culture and Tourism thanked the Committee and ICOMOS, the World Heritage Centre and transmitted to them a message from the highest authorities in his country. The text of his intervention is included as Annex VI to this report.

  

Property	The Historic Town of Vigan
Id. N°	502Rev
State Party	Philippines
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): Vigan represents a unique fusion of Asian building design and construction with European colonial architecture and planning.

Criterion (iv): Vigan is an exceptionally intact and well-preserved example of a European trading town in East and South-East Asia.

  

Property	Kalwaria Zebrzydowska: the Mannerist architectural and Park Landscape Complex and Pilgrimage Park
Id. N°	905
State Party	Poland
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criterion (ii): Kalwaria Zebrzydowska is an exceptional cultural monument in which the natural landscape was used as the setting for a symbolic representation in the form of chapels and avenues of the events of the Passion of Christ. The result is a cultural landscape of great beauty and spiritual quality in which natural and man-made elements combine in a harmonious manner.

Criterion (iv): The Counter Reformation in the late 16th century led to a flowering in the creation of Calvaries in Europe. Kalwaria Zebrzydowska is an outstanding example of this type of large-scale landscape design, which incorporates natural beauty with spiritual objectives and the principles of Baroque park design.

  

Property	Historic Centre of Sighisoara
Id. N°	902
State Party	Romania
Criteria	C (iii) (v)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (v):

Criterion (iii): Sighisoara is an outstanding testimony to the culture of the Transylvanian Saxons, a culture that is coming to a close after 850 years and will continue to exist only through its architectural and urban monuments.

Criterion (v): Sighisoara is an outstanding example of a small fortified city in the border region between the Latin-oriented culture of Central Europe and the Byzantine-Orthodox culture of south-eastern Europe. The apparently unstoppable process of emigration by the Saxons, the social stratum that had formed and upheld the cultural traditions of the region, threatens the survival of their architectural heritage as well.

The Observer of Germany recommended that the Government of Romania should inform the Committee through the World Heritage Centre of the approval of the new law on cultural heritage that has been submitted to Parliament. Approval of this law is foreseen in February 2000.

The Delegate of Hungary recalled that he had made a detailed statement on this nomination at the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau.

  

Property	The Wooden Churches of Maramures
Id. N°	904
State Party	Romania
Criteria	C (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):

Criterion (iv): The Maramures wooden churches are outstanding examples of vernacular religious wooden architecture resulting from the interchange of Orthodox religious traditions with Gothic influences in a specific vernacular interpretation of timber construction traditions, showing a high level of artistic maturity and craft skills.

It was noted that neighbouring States Parties could consider proposing to add other wooden churches to this inscription.

  

Property	The Dacian Fortresses of the Orastie Mountains
Id. N°	906
State Party	Romania
Criteria	C (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii), and (iv):

Criterion (ii): The Dacian Fortresses represent the fusion of techniques and concepts of military architecture from inside and outside the classical world to create a unique style.

Criterion (iii): The Geto-Dacian Kingdoms of the late 1st millennium BC attained an exceptionally high cultural and socio-economic level, and this is symbolized by this group of fortresses.

Criterion (iv): The hill-fort and its evolved successor, the oppidum, were characteristic of the Late Iron Age in Europe, and the Dacian Fortresses are outstanding examples of this type of defended site.

With reference to the three properties from Romania inscribed on the World Heritage List, the Observer of Germany stated that Sighisoara and the churches of Maramures relate to the common heritage of the pluri-cultural society in Transylvania which, unfortunately is now disappearing. Germany will continue its support to encounter the problems caused by massive emigration from this region.

  

Property	Brimstone Hill Fortress National Park
Id. N°	910
State Party	Saint Christopher & Nevis
Criteria	C (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):

Criterion (iii): Brimstone Hill is an outstanding British fortress, built by slave labour to exact standards during a peak period of European colonial expansion in the Caribbean.

Criterion (iv): Because of its strategic layout and construction, Brimstone Hill Fortress is an exceptional and well preserved example of 17th and 18th century British military architecture.

Several delegates emphasized the importance of this fortification in relation to the slave trade and the need of its remembrance. It was also observed that this inscription contributes to a better representation of the Caribbean on the World Heritage List.

  

Property	The Fossil Hominid Sites of Sterkfontein, Swartkrans, Kromdraai, and Environs
Id. N°	915
State Party	South Africa
Criteria	C (iii) (vi)

The Committee inscribed this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (vi):

Criteria (iii) and (vi): The Sterkfontein area contains an exceptionally large and scientifically significant group of sites which throw light on the earliest ancestors of humankind. They constitute a vast reserve of scientific information, the potential of which is enormous.

In response to the Delegate of Thailand, ICOMOS indicated that criterion (vi) was proposed due to the importance of the site for the history of humankind, like the Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China) and the Sangiran Early Man Site (Indonesia).

  

Property	Robben Island
Id. N°	916
State Party	South Africa
Criteria	C (iii) (vi)

The Committee inscribed this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (vi):

Criterion (iii): The buildings of Robben Island bear eloquent witness to its sombre history.

Criterion (vi): Robben Island and its prison buildings symbolize the triumph of the human spirit, of freedom, and of democracy over oppression.

Many members of the Committee expressed their pleasure and emotion and congratulated South Africa for having proposed this site which symbolizes the fight against oppression, the victory of democracy as well as the process of national reconciliation.

Over and over again the members of the Committee paid homage to the vision of President Mandela. The Delegate of Thailand considered that criterion (vi) could be amended during the session so that the inscription of the site would be possible only under this criterion.

The Committee took note of the need to discuss the amendments that could be proposed under criterion (vi).

The Chairperson expressed satisfaction with this inscription and considered that this decision has been taken on the African ground was an honour for Morocco. The Delegate of South Africa expressed her appreciation for the Committee’s decision (see Annex VII to this report).

  

Property	San Cristóbal de la Laguna
Id. N°	929
State Party	Spain
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Criteria (ii) and (iv): San Cristóbal de la Laguna was the first non-fortified Spanish colonial town, and its layout provided the model for many colonial towns in the Americas.

  

Property	State Historical and Cultural Park "Ancient Merv"
Id. N°	886
State Party	Turkmenistan
Criteria	C (ii) (iii)

The Committee inscribed the property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):

Criterion (ii): The cities of the Merv oasis have exerted considerable influence over the cultures of Central Asia and Iran for four millennia. Seljuk City in particular, influenced architecture and architectural decoration and scientific and cultural development.

Criterion (iii): The sequence of the cities of the Merv oasis, their fortifications, and their urban lay-outs bear exceptional testimony to the civilizations of Central Asia over several millennia.

The Committee congratulated the State Party for nominating its first World Heritage site, which has enhanced the representativity and balance of the World Heritage List.

  

Property	The Heart of Neolithic Orkney
Id. N°	514 Rev
State Party	United Kingdom
Criteria	C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i),(ii),(iii), and (iv):

The monuments of Orkney, dating back to 3000-2000 BC, are outstanding testimony to the cultural achievements of the Neolithic peoples of northern Europe.

  

Property	Hoi An Ancient Town
Id. N°	948
State Party	Viet Nam
Criteria	C (ii) (v)

The Committee inscribed this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (v):

Criterion (ii): Hoi An is an outstanding material manifestation of the fusion of cultures over time in an international commercial port.

Criterion (v): Hoi An is an exceptionally well-preserved example of a traditional Asian trading port.

  

Property	My Son Sanctuary
Id. N°	949
State Party	Viet Nam
Criteria	C (ii) (iii)

The Committee inscribed this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):

Criterion (ii): The My Son Sanctuary is an exceptional example of cultural interchange, with an indigenous society adapting to external cultural influences, notably the Hindu art and architecture of the Indian sub-continent.

Criterion (iii): The Champa Kingdom was an important phenomenon in the political and cultural history of South-East Asia, vividly illustrated by the ruins of My Son.

The Delegate of China, speaking on behalf of all Asian and Pacific delegates, members of the Committee, warmly supported this nomination. He expressed the satisfaction of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau in respecting the wish of the State Party with regard to the name and size of the property.

The Delegate of Thailand, underlining that appropriate criteria, and not the numbers of criteria, was important in defining the World Heritage values of properties, requested the advisory bodies to strictly apply appropriate criteria for properties to be inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee took note of the Delegate’s request that the International Expert Meeting on the Operational Guidelines (April 2000) take this into consideration when revising criteria within the Operational Guidelines.

The Observer of Vietnam thanked the Committee for its decision and informed the Committee about the growing awareness of World Heritage in his country.

  

C.2Extension of cultural properties already inscribed on the World Heritage List

Property	Butrint
Id. N°	570 Bis
State Party	Albania
Criteria	C (iii)

ICOMOS expressed its concern that tourism developments in a small area on the coast, excluded from the proposed extension, could have a disastrous impact on the site. ICOMOS, therefore, strongly recommended that this area be included in the protected area.

The Committee decided to extend the property under the existing criterion (iii) under the condition that the excluded area would be included in the zone of the proposed enlargement.

The Delegate of Italy offered the interest of his Government to support the Albanian Government in the preparation and implementation of the management plan for the site.

  

Property	Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin – Extension
Id. N°	532 Ter
State Party	Germany
Criteria	C (i)(ii)(iv)

The Committee approved this extension to the World Heritage site of the Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin, on the World Heritage List under the existing criteria (i), (ii) and (iv).

  

Property	Ferrara, City of the Renaissance and its Po Delta (extension of Ferrara, city of the Renaissance)
Id. N°	733 Bis
State Party	Italy
Criteria	C (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)

The Committee approved this extension to the World Heritage site of the City of Ferrara and to inscribe this site on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (v), in addition to the already existing criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi):

Criterion (iii): The Este ducal residences in the Po Delta illustrate the influence of Renaissance culture on the natural landscape in an exceptional manner.

Criterion (v): The Po Delta is an outstanding planned cultural landscape that retains its original form to a remarkable extent.

As requested by the State Party, the Committee decided to change the name of the inscribed property to "Ferrara, City of the Renaissance and its Po Delta".

  

Property	The Villages with fortified churches in Transylvania (extension of Biertan and its Fortified Church)
Id. N°	596 Bis
State Party	Romania
Criteria	C (iv)

The Committee approved this extension to the World Heritage site Biertan and its fortified church, on the World Heritage List under the existing criterion (iv).

 

C.3Cultural Property which the Committee decided to defer

Property	The Loire Valley between Maine and Sully-sur-Loire
Id. N°	933
State Party	France
Criteria	C (ii) (iv)

A lengthy and substantive debate took place with regard to this nomination and on the general issue of cultural landscapes.

It was generally recognised that the Loire Valley had outstanding universal value and was worthy of being inscribed as a cultural landscape on the World Heritage List under cultural criteria (ii) and (iv). It was also noted that a Steering Committee with representation from territorial authorities and institutions involved, had been established to oversee the management of the area and that the management of this complex and extensive cultural site was exemplary, innovative and appropriate. However, several delegates raised concerns about the nuclear power plant located within the boundaries of the proposed site.

After a first round of discussions, the Chairperson established a working group with the participation of Australia, Benin, Finland, France, Italy, Thailand, the United Kingdom and ICOMOS. At a later stage, the Delegate of Italy who had chaired the working group summarised the discussions and informed the Committee that no consensus had been reached. One of the issues in the discussions had been the interpretation of the definition of the category of the "organically evolved landscape" and its sub-category of the "continuing landscape" in which the "evolutionary process is still in progress" (Operational Guidelines, paragraph 39 (ii)), and whether or not an industrial plant would be compatible with a World Heritage property of this kind.

ICOMOS proposed to the Committee that the property be inscribed on the World Heritage List with reference being made to the disturbing presence of the nuclear power plant and a recommendation made to the State Party to take the appropriate measures to prevent eventual risks. ICOMOS underlined the responsibility of the State Party and the Management Steering Committee in this respect. He also noted that a clarification of the definition of the organically evolved landscape was needed. Concern was expressed that this issue was not raised in the ICOMOS evaluation.

The Observer of France emphasized that all the recommendations made by ICOMOS and endorsed by the Bureau in July 1999, were implemented. He expressed regret that the matter of the industrial plant was not raised earlier in the recommendations of the Bureau at its sessions in July and November. For this reason, the State Party was not given the chance to respond to eventual concerns about this matter that is an issue that had been largely studied by the Government with all necessary risk assessment in place. He noted that there was a matter of principle involved in the discussion, namely the question if contemporary elements inherent to modern life are accepted in a cultural landscape. He pointed out that France had presented this important cultural heritage nomination in the framework of the Global Strategy and with the aim of diversifying the World Heritage List. He said that this nomination had required much effort for its conception and had received wide support in France. He also commented that the national authorities had created a Management Steering Committee for the site, which was innovative for this country. Furthermore, the Observer stated his concern regarding the objections to the nuclear power plant, and questioned whether the objections would have been the same in the case of an industrial plant of a different nature. He urged the Committee to substantiate its decision and said that ICOMOS’s proposal would be acceptable to the State Party.

During the debate that followed, two differing positions emerged. Some delegates supported the view that modern elements are acceptable in a continuing landscape and noted that, in this case, adequate measures and contingency plans were in place. The Delegate of Belgium declared that the World Heritage Committee was not the appropriate venue to conduct discussions relating to nuclear energy. Other delegates stressed the need for more in-depth consideration of this issue and recommended that consideration of this nomination be deferred. It was also emphasized that a fundamental discussion on the interpretation of the cultural landscape categories, a very promising concept for many States Parties, might be necessary, but that this discussion should not take place in the context of, and influence the, consideration of a particular landscape nomination.

IUCN noted that it had reviewed the nomination but that the presence of a nuclear power plant had not been obvious in the dossier. IUCN stressed that a decision by the World Heritage Committee to inscribe this site on the World Heritage List could send a message to the outside world that sites of outstanding universal value can have large industrial developments, including nuclear power plants, within their boundaries. He stated that this debate should not jeopardize the significance or the value of the cultural landscape concept.

The Chairperson then called for a vote on this matter. The Director of the World Heritage Centre read the rules from the Rules and Procedures that refer to the voting procedures. The Chairperson then asked the Committee members to vote for two options: (a) in favour of inscription of the Loire Valley on the World Heritage List, or (b) deferral of the examination to the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau.

The Delegates of Belgium, Benin, Canada, China, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Italy, Malta, Mexico, Portugal and Thailand voted for inscription on the World Heritage List. The delegates of Australia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, the Republic of Korea, South Africa and Zimbabwe voted for deferral. Morocco and Egypt abstained.

The Chairperson noted that, in accordance with rule 29.2 of the Rules of Procedure, the required majority was two-thirds of the Committee members present and voting. As nineteen Committee members were present and voting, he concluded that the required number for a majority was thirteen. With twelve votes for inscription and seven votes for deferral, the Chairperson declared the examination of the nomination of the Loire Valley between Maine and Sully-sur-Loire deferred.

The Observer of France thanked all members of the Committee for their serious consideration of this nomination and noted that basic and fundamental issues had been raised, and that this would certainly stimulate and encourage States Parties to continue in this innovative line. The Chairperson thanked the Observer of France for the courageous nomination and the members of the Committee for their participation in the debate.

 

C.4Cultural Properties which the Committee did not inscribe on the World Heritage List

Property	Sarajevo - Unique symbol of universal multiculture–continual open city
Id. N°	851 Rev
State Party	Bosnia and Herzegovina

The Committee decided not to inscribe this property on the World Heritage List.

 

Property	The Kysuce-Orava Switchback Railroad
Id. N°	756
State Party	Slovakia

The Committee decided not to inscribe this property on the World Heritage List.

VIII.7 At the end of the session, the Chairperson recalled the resolution adopted in October 1999 by the twelfth General Assembly on the ways and means to ensure a representative World Heritage List, and:

1. congratulated the States having submitted proposals for inscription relating to under-represented categories, in particular cultural landscapes, living cultures and technological heritage as well as the States that had submitted nominations for inscription for the first time;
2. noted that five natural sites in Latin America and the Caribbean had been inscribed, in regions where natural heritage is still under-represented;
3. recalled that all States Parties, the Bureau, the Committee, the advisory bodies should take into account the goals of the Global Strategy and give close consideration to the resulting analyses and recommendations so that each of their actions and decisions are aimed at ensuring the representativeness of the List;
4. referred to the discussions on criterion (vi) and (iii) and the need to continue the reflection in the framework of the revision of the criteria;
5. regretted that the examination of the fifty-five nominations for inscription was conducted in such a limited time and noted once again the timetable of the Committee’s work was very heavy and that the number of nominations for inscription continued to increase. He requested the Committee, the advisory bodies and the Secretariat to ensure that the nominations for inscription could be very carefully and rigorously examined in accordance with the Operational Guidelines, and within a reasonable time period.

The Director of the World Heritage Centre read out the list of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List.

 

IX.PERIODIC REPORTING: REGIONAL STRATEGIES FOR PERIODIC REPORTING

IX.1 The Secretariat presented the Working Document WHC-99/CONF.209/12 that contains the Action Plan for the Arab region which should be completed by December 2000, and the periodic reporting exercise for the African States that should be completed by December 2001.

IX.2 Particular mention was made of the links with the implementation of the Global Strategy. The periodic monitoring exercise would help States Parties to recognize their insufficiencies in the field of conservation and facilitate the identification of their needs. The managers of the sites will be trained and ultimately regional expert networks will be strengthened.

IX.3 In the Arab States, eighteen States Parties will have to prepare reports concerning forty-four sites (41 cultural, one mixed and two natural). The exercise for the Arab region which should be completely finalised over a period of less than eleven months, comprises the following stages:

.an analysis of information available to UNESCO and the advisory bodies (nomination files, statutory reports, mission reports, etc.);

.an information and training phase for responsible nationals in charge of the preparation of the reports of their countries (regional seminar, preparatory work, national seminars);

.preparatory phase for national reports to be attended by international consultants to assist States Parties;

.a phase for the synthesis of reports and the preparation of the regional report which should be ready by September 2000 for submission to the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee.

This exercise in the Arab region, which will serve as a useful example for the other regions, will permit the (i) harmonisation of national tentative lists; (ii) validation of the use of this exercise for the revision of early nomination files, incomplete in comparison to the new format; (iii) testing the questionnaires of the exercise in a continuum way; (iv) verification of the criteria concerning the sites; (v) identification of the regional and national priorities in terms of international co-operation. Finally, it will allow the Secretariat to improve its information on the sites inscribed and will also be beneficial to States Parties.

IX.4 In Africa, eighteen States Parties will have to prepare reports concerning forty sites, twenty-three of which are natural, sixteen cultural and one mixed. The exercise for Africa was conceived in seven stages that have been established in a participatory manner to involve States Parties and site managers, thereby ensuring a training character to the preparation of the final report.

Stage I: Preparation and dispatch of a specific form to draw the attention of States Parties to the monitoring issue and to obtain a first input of information relating to the implementation of the Convention.

Stage II: Collection of preliminary results and elaboration of regional workshop programmes, to process the resulting information into a data base and to identify specific information which should be provided to each site manager during the training seminars.

Stage III: Organization of two regional training seminars: Anglophone and Francophone Africa, which will convene managers of both natural and cultural site. During these workshops, they will:

.present their sites and identify common issues;

.have the opportunity to discuss the methodology of the exercise;

.obtain additional information for the completion of the forms for each site.

These three stages should be completed by autumn 2000.

Stage IV: Exchange of additional information with site managers, before reception of the final version of the forms.

Stage V: Analysis of the forms to compare the site in situ between the time of inscription and the present; define minimal methods for regular monitoring, identify the involvement of local populations in the management of the sites and identify the site issues.

Stage VI: Identification of fragile sites and study missions (2001).

Stage VII: Completion of the final report and dissemination of the exercise, and submission of the report to the Committee for 2001.

The periodic report will constitute a reflection of the situation. In a continent where the collection, analysis and stockage of information is often difficult, the emphasis will be placed on understanding the conservation process, the importance of collecting of information and its presentation and use, rather than on the exhaustive research for information.

IX.5 During these discussions, fourteen speakers took the floor, including the three advisory bodies and congratulated the Secretariat for the clarity of the document, its conception and the transparency of the proposed budget. The importance of the participatory approach and the importance given to training were also emphasized. However, the speakers insisted upon the need to continue the exercise, to establish a cumulative process, the importance of the documentation, the identification of key indicators, the implication of the local populations, and public awareness raising. They commented that this exercise should also include a communication plan. They requested that the role of the advisory bodies be defined.

IX.6 The Representative of IUCN informed the Committee that the systematic approach to periodic reporting on a regional basis is a very positive initiative but IUCN, as one of advisory bodies named in the Convention, is unclear as to what role, if any, it is expected to play in the periodic reporting process. The role of the advisory bodies in reactive monitoring is clear from the Operational Guidelines. He stated for example that the material on the process in Arab States as well as in Africa does not make any mention of the advisory bodies. With these first regional strategies, IUCN thought that it was very important that the Committee indicates clearly whether the advisory bodies have a role to play in the regions, as it will establish a pattern for the future. IUCN informed the Committee that it has rich experience in association with States Parties that it could bring to bear on periodic reporting. He recalled the statements made by several delegates that stressed the value of IUCN’s input. The Representative of IUCN further noted that the involvement of the advisory bodies would have resource implications. Moreover, IUCN is working towards the World Parks Congress (held every ten years) to be convened in Durban, South Africa in September 2002, and IUCN is planning two regional working sessions in Africa - one for Francophone Africa and the other for Anglophone Africa during 2001.

IX.7 The views of IUCN were supported by ICOMOS and ICCROM and fully endorsed by several delegates. ICOMOS specifically stressed the importance of regional monitoring and stated that the periodic reporting exercise should be considered as a formative one where site managers can be trained, and called for more liaison with the with the advisory bodies in view of their experience in producing Guidelines. In reference to remarks made by several delegates on the Reference Manual for Monitoring, ICCROM clarified the place of the manual in the periodic reporting process. The Representative of ICCROM stated that the Committee had allocated US$8,000 to ICCROM in December 1998 to begin the development of a Reference Manual for Monitoring. ICCROM organized two meetings in 1999 with experts representing the advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre, to develop an approach for preparing the manual. The purpose of the Manual is to provide guidance to site managers at the local level, a target that is recognized as important in the process of periodic reporting by several delegates. ICCROM has been working with the other advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre in the development of the Manual, that has been designed to be a useful scientific reference tool for site managers at all levels of responsibility in carrying out their duties. ICCROM has submitted a request of US$16,000 to the current session of the Committee in order to finalize the Manual, an initiative that should be considered as complementary to the Centre’s presentation.

IX.8 Several delegates stressed the importance of establishing benchmarks and indicators and while these may be established at the site level, the monitoring process should not be an end in itself, but should serve different levels of the citizenry, and should be forward-looking with a well defined objective.

IX.9 Committee members stressed that the periodic monitoring exercise should be targeted primarily to involve the States Parties and site managers, and that putting the process into the hands of the local managers would render it more useful. It was emphasized that the local population should be involved as much as possible since their participation is critical to the conservation of heritage.

IX.10 At the end of the debate, precisions and clarifications were provided by the Secretariat which has committed to reflect in the forms which will be sent to States Parties, the remarks made by the Committee.

IX.11 The Committee requested the Secretariat to take note of the proposal to invite the participation of the UNEP/PAM Programme 100 historical sites in the exercise to benefit from the resources and gain experience.

IX.12 The Committee approved the methodology, the action plan of the Arab region, as well as the strategic approach of the exercise for the African region. It took note of the budgetary proposals for 2000 that will be processed during the examination of the work plan and budget of the World Heritage Fund.

 

X.STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

A.REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER

X.1 The Committee examined that state of conservation of fifteen natural and four cultural properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

NATURAL HERITAGE

 

X.2 Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria)

The Committee was informed that the State Party had submitted a detailed report on the project for monitoring the state of conservation of Srebarna and, in accordance with the request of the twenty-second session of the Committee (Kyoto, Japan, 1998), the Ministry of Environment and Water of the Republic of Bulgaria had submitted a National Report "concerning the progress in restoration of ecological status of Srebarna Reserve in accordance with its removing from the List of World Heritage in Danger". IUCN and the Centre presented a review of the information contained in these reports and the Committee noted the following:

The Bulgarian Government has voted in the Law on Protected Areas (November 1998), and during 1999, developed and adopted a National Action Plan for Biodiversity Conservation. The Law, which is built upon Europe-wide legislation and directives, has enabled the implementation of a large number of urgent actions for protected areas, including that for Srebarna; e.g. the creation of decrees and regulations on the development of management plans, structure and actions of regional authorities and activities permitted within state owned protected areas. The Action Plan strengthens the ability of the Ministry of Environment and Water to co-ordinate actions of other economic sector agencies in areas outside of protected areas, thus strengthening the Ministry’s authority to co-ordinate development actions in the region where Srebarna is located.

The Ministry of Environment and Water has widened collaboration with Romania and the rest of the countries of the Lower Danube to study the feasibility of enlarging the system of wetland areas in the Danube valley. During a meeting with the Romanian authorities, suggestions for the setting up of a working group have been made to co-ordinate biodiversity conservation along the banks of the Danube and the Black Sea coast. IUCN emphasised that such trans-border cooperation is critical for the conservation of flagship species such as the Dalmatian pelican.

The Ministry has increased efforts to involve the public in the management of Srebarna and surrounding areas. Participation of several schools and NGOs in programmes for monitoring water quality and the status of selected populations of animals and plants has been encouraged. The local public and the media have been fully appraised of the Government’s efforts to restore Srebarna’s World Heritage and protected area values. A new web-site for the Reserve has been opened at: http://www.ecolab.bas.bg/srebarna/ and provides data concerning the Government’s efforts to protect the site.

The Committee noted the following trends that indicate continuing success of the restoration process:

• Nutrient concentrations in Lake Srebarna have reduced significantly and current ranges appear to be normal for an eutrophic environment such as Srebarna;

• In 1999 a five-fold decrease in nitrogen and phosphate concentrations has been registered;

• The concentration of Chlorophyll A in the water continues and is a favourable trend towards minimising the eutrophication of the waters of the Lake;

• Breeding success of the Dalmatian pelicans, unusually high in 1998 (99 chicks born from 80 breeding pairs) has been sustained in 1999; i.e. 74 chicks have been born from the 65 nesting sites that have been monitored.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger but noted with satisfaction the continuing success in the recovery of the site and commended and encouraged the State Party to take all necessary measures to sustain current trends in ecological and population parameters that are being monitored. The Committee encouraged the State Party to continue to develop its co-operation with Romania and other countries of the Lower Danube to study the possibility, as per the Committee’s recommendation made in 1998, of the establishment of a composite, trans-boundary "Danube Wetland World Heritage site". The Committee invited the State Party to submit an up-to-date report on the state of conservation of Srebarna to its twenty-fourth session in 2000. Based on a review of that report, IUCN and the Centre may propose to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee, a process and a time-table for a final assessment of the results of the restoration of Srebarna and its possible removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2001.

 

X.3 Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris National Park (Central African Republic (CAR))

The Committee noted with concern that the President of the State Party has not responded to letters from the Director-General and the Chairperson, transmitting the recommendations of the twenty-second session of the Committee (Kyoto, Japan, 1998), inviting the President’s urgent intervention for the preparation of a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the conservation of the site. IUCN informed the Committee that it has received a report that calls for an urgent project formulation mission to the site. Other reports received from sources external to the State Party indicate continuing decline in the conditions of integrity of the Park. The EU project that started in 1988 was able to arrest some of the deteriorating conditions. But the implementation of that project was interrupted several times and with the final termination of the project due in 1999 the Park may become completely open to poachers. The reports received by the Centre and IUCN call for: (a) demonstration of national political will for the site’s protection; (b) launching of a project integrating the management of the Park with the needs of local communities; (c) integrating village community leaders into the management of the Park; and (d) a participatory management regime that combines conservation and sustainable use of the site and the sensitization of national authorities and the local community to the need for such a management regime.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the Director-General of UNESCO and the Chairperson of the Committee to write once again to the President of CAR drawing his attention to their letters already sent in 1999 and calling for the President’s urgent intervention to ensure protection of the site. The Committee requested UNESCO to collaborate with the Embassy of the CAR in France and urged both UNESCO and IUCN to work through their Offices in Central Africa and the UN Resident Co-ordinator’s Office in the CAR to encourage the relevant authorities in the State Party to invite a Centre/IUCN mission to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and an emergency rehabilitation plan for the site.

       

X.4 Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

Virunga National Park
Garamba National Park
Kahuzi Biega National Park
Okapi Wildlife Reserve

The Committee recalled the fact that at its last session (Kyoto, Japan, 1998) it had requested the Centre and IUCN to consult with ICCN and conservation NGOs working in the DRC and estimate the cost of paying allowances to staff at Virunga National Park as an interim measure, and submit a proposal for emergency assistance for consideration by the twenty-third session of the Bureau in 1999. The conservation NGOs, ICCN, concerned bilateral organisations (GTZ (Germany)), IUCN and UNESCO met in April 1999 (in Naivasha, Kenya), and at the time of the twenty-third session of the Bureau in July 1999. Discussions were held on the state of conservation of the World Heritage sites of DRC and the implementation of the recommendation made by the last session of the Committee. Discussions during these two meetings revealed that staff in all the four World Heritage sites in Danger urgently needed assistance. The Director-General of ICCN informed the twenty-third session of the Bureau in July 1999 that his office in Kinshasa no longer has direct access to the four sites. He requested the Bureau and the Committee to help the staff in the four sites by providing assistance through the conservation NGOs and other partners who had field presence in the four sites. In response to requests submitted by ICCN in co-operation with the conservation NGOs and other partners, the Bureau approved a total sum of US$ 105,000 for the four sites. These funds are being disbursed via contracts established with UNESCO and ICCN’s partners as follows:

(i) World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) - Virunga National Park: to pay, for the period of six months between July and December 1999, salaries of 500 persons at the Rwindi and the Mutsora Field Stations and salary supplements to selected staff who are active in anti-poaching surveillance operations (US$ 35,000);

(ii) International Rhino Foundation (IRF) - Garamba National Park: to pay, for the period of six months between July and December 1999, salaries of approximately 238 persons and additional salary supplements to selected staff who are active in anti-poaching surveillance operations (US$ 30,000);

(iii) To the GTZ(Germany)/ICCN Project – Kahuzi Biega National Park: to purchase equipment essential for patrolling and surveillance operations of guards; i.e. 100 patrolling gear, 8 walkie-talkies, 15 large and 15 small tents and local travel, transport and miscellaneous expenses (US$ 20,000); and

(iv) Gilman International Conservation (GIC) -Okapi Faunal Reserve: for staff training and guard camp construction activities (US$ 20,000).

The Committee noted that the implementation of the above-mentioned contracts are proceeding satisfactorily.

The Committee was pleased to learn that the support for the above-mentioned activities initiated by the request approved by the Bureau will be extended over a period of 4 years through a project, approved by the United Nations Foundation (UNF), for a sum of US$ 4,186,600 and entitled: "Biodiversity Conservation in Regions of Armed Conflict: Protecting World Natural Heritage in the Democratic Republic of the Congo". UNF will provide US$ 2,895,912 as an outright contribution and co-operate with UNESCO and its partners to raise the balance of US$ 1,290,688 from alternative sources. The UNF project assures payment of allowances to significant numbers of guards and workers in the four sites for 4 years beginning in the year 2000. This would free the partners from costs that they have incurred thus far in paying those allowances. The partners have assured UNESCO and UNF that they will use the savings to assist ICCN to meet the costs of indemnities and other payments due to large numbers of staff who are due to retire from service in all four sites. The partners have informed the Centre that special arrangements for meeting the needs of retiring staff in the northern and central sectors of Virunga, commemorating its 75^th anniversary as Africa’s first national park in 2000, would be required.

UNESCO and ICCN designed and developed the project with the close co-operation of specialists from UNESCO’s Division of Ecological Sciences, and their partners. The Centre will be the international manager of the project with technical support from the UNESCO Division of Ecological Sciences and IUCN. ICCN will ensure national level co-ordination of the project. Site level activities will be implemented through the partners. In addition, the project will provide, via the GTZ/ICCN Project staff, assistance to the fifth World Heritage site of the DRC, i.e. Salonga National Park,which has been included in the List of World Heritage in Danger by the current session of the Committee.

The Committee noted that the Centre and the UNESCO Division of Ecological Sciences participated at a meeting in Nairobi, Kenya, from 18 to 22 November 1999 to discuss the finalization of the UNF project document. The meeting was attended by all NGO partners, GTZ, ICCN and the Legal Advisor of the Ministry of Environment of the DRC and representatives of staff of all the five World Heritage sites of the DRC. The Vice-Minister for the Environment of the DRC attended the last day of the meeting and was presented with the conclusions of the meeting. He said his Ministry will fully support the implementation of the UNF project and that ICCN would serve as the national coordinating body and will enable the work of the partners and UNESCO for delivering assistance provided by UNF directly to the sites.

The Committee was informed that representatives of staff from the four sites in Danger as well as Salonga provided reports on the state of conservation of the sites at the Nairobi meeting mentioned above. Ability of staff to undertake regular patrols and surveillance activities has improved in Okapi, Kahuzi Biega and Garamba and are more or less stable in Virunga and Salonga. The site representatives thanked the Committee for the assistance provided by the July 1999 session of the Bureau that is contributing significantly to raising staff morale and effectiveness of surveillance work. The guards and workers in the sites are eagerly awaiting the beginning of the implementation of the UNF project that would assure them a certain stability of working conditions over a 4-year period. Despite improvements or stabilisation in working conditions, the threats to the integrity of the five sites continue to prevail. These threats mainly arise from the presence of armed groups within the sites that deny accessibility to significant parts of the site to staff. These armed groups are under the influence of forces outside of the DRC but factions of the rebel movement in DRC are also active in some sites. Return to normalcy cannot be assured until such armed groups allow staff to patrol and survey all parts of the sites under consideration. Several reports received by the Centre and IUCN describe the situation in the sites in DRC as an ecological catastrophe and poaching on gorillas, elephants and other wildlife species appear to be intensive. However, IUCN has received other reports that have observed a reduction in encounters between rangers and poachers in Garamba National Park during 1999. IUCN, in response to the issue raised by the Delegate of Thailand regarding possible removal of one or more of the DRC sites from the World Heritage List, pointed out that detailed information to explore such options was not available at present. Following further interventions by the Delegate of Benin, the Centre and IUCN, the Committee agreed that it should provide all necessary support for the satisfactory implementation of the UNF project to fully explore the feasibility of restoring the sites in the DRC over the next four years.

The Committee took into account the message from representatives of site staff who were present at the Nairobi meeting, that the Committee appeal to all parties concerned with the on-going armed conflict in the eastern parts of DRC to respect the international status of World Heritage sites and create the necessary conditions for staff to carry out their duties and functions in an effective manner. Furthermore, the Committee was informed that site representatives and partners at the Nairobi meeting had requested that the Committee consider providing financial assistance to cover the cost of the implementation of some critical activities, i.e. a mission to DRC to explain to authorities in Kinshasa and in the regions where the sites are located about the international significance of the sites and the importance of the effective execution of the UNF project; paying staff, due to retire soon, in the central and northern sectors of Virunga, necessary allowances and ensuring their integration into the life of the local communities. These two activities need to be implemented as soon as possible and before the execution of the UNF-financed project that is scheduled to begin in the first quarter of 2000.

The Committee, while expressing its serious concerns regarding the threats facing the sites and retaining all four sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger, welcomed the international response to the protection of these sites. The Committee commended the dedication of the resident guards and workers to the protection of the sites and the UNF for its generous contribution over a 4-year period to meet basic needs of protection of these globally important sites suffering from the impacts of armed conflict. In addition, the Committee called upon the Centre, in co-operation with ICCN, partner NGOs, GTZ and IUCN to:

• Estimate the total costs of organizing the intermediary mission recommended by the Nairobi meeting of partners and site representatives and the additional amount needed to pay pension benefits to staff at the central and northern sectors of Virunga and submit an emergency assistance request for consideration and approval by the Chairperson;

• Identify an appropriate and neutral person who could undertake the intermediary field mission to the DRC as quickly as possible with the co-operation of UNDP and UN agencies that have a presence in Kinshasa and in the regions where concerned sites are located; and

• Ensure an early launch and effective implementation of the UNF-financed project and submit progress reports to the annual sessions of the Committee beginning from the year 2000.

Furthermore the Committee,

• Requested its Chairperson to write to the President of the UNF thanking him for the generous support provided for the conservation of the World Natural Heritage sites in Danger in the DRC;

• Invited the Director-General of UNESCO to write to the President of the DRC and to the Heads of States of all neighbouring countries implicated in the war in eastern DRC, drawing their attention to the need to ensure the conservation of the universal values of these sites that are protected by international law. In that letter, the Director-General may also wish to request that the Heads of States concerned take all measures within their powers to ensure that staff working in the World Heritage sites of the DRC are given the necessary safety and assistance to carry out their work in a normal and effective manner;

• Invited all of its Members and States Parties to the Convention, through their embassies and other contacts, to call upon the President of the DRC and the Heads of neighbouring states implicated in the war in eastern DRC, and to urge them to ensure respect for international law protecting World Natural Heritage and seek assurances and support for the work of staff resident in the sites;

• Invited the Director-General of UNESCO to write to heads of concerned UN agencies, including the UN Secretary General and UN resident Co-ordinators in the DRC and the neighbouring states, asking for their co-operation in ensuring support for the work of the staff in the sites protected by international law and for the effective implementation of the UNF project for the conservation of the World Heritage sites in the DRC;

• Invited the Director-General of UNESCO to lead a mission, as soon as possible, to Kinshasa and the capitals of nearby countries implicated in the war in eastern DRC, to meet with the Heads of States and call for their attention and respect for compliance with international law that the conservation of these sites urgently demand; and

• Invited the Director of the Centre to write to the Heads of all the partner conservation NGOs and GTZ, thanking them for the support rendered for the conservation of the sites in the DRC and co-operating with the Centre for developing the project approved for financing by the UNF. In that letter, the Director should also invite the Heads of the partner organisations to use savings that they may obtain due to the approval of the UNF Project to reinvest in other activities in support of the conservation of the World Natural Heritage sites of the DRC and continue their co-operation with the Centre and the UNF to raise additional resources and to establish a long-term financing mechanism for conservation of the World Natural Heritage of the DRC.

 

X.5 Sangay National Park (Ecuador)

The Committee was pleased to note that, in accordance with the recommendation of its twenty-second session (Kyoto, 1998), the State Party had invited a mission to the site. The mission had been undertaken by IUCN experts and representatives of WWF, Fundacion Natura and the Ministry for the Environment of Ecuador, from 10 to 14 June 1999. The State Party did not have adequate time to respond to the mission’s findings at the time of the twenty-third session of the Bureau (5-10 July 1999). Hence, the Bureau had requested that the State Party provide a detailed report on the findings and recommendations of the mission to the site before 15 September 1999. The report of the mission, presented in Document WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.13, noted several positive developments with regard to the state of conservation of this site and made a number of recommendations. However, the mission team suggested that the Committee retain the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger until the outcome of efforts to implement the management plan and restore damage caused by the Guamote-Macas road is assessed. As requested by the July 1999 session of the Bureau, the State Party provided its views on the mission’s findings and recommendations. In reviewing the position of the State Party, IUCN has made the following observations and suggestions:

• IUCN welcomes the completion of the management plan and activities underway to define strategies for its implementation. It acknowledges the contribution of the Project "Biodiversity Conservation and Participatory Management of Sangay National Park" in establishing base line information necessary for restoring areas damaged by the Guamote-Macas road and commends the Dutch Government for the support and guidance provided for the project;

• IUCN agrees with the State Party’s suggestion that the site be retained on the List of World Heritage in Danger and be continuously monitored, particularly with regard to on-going activities to implement the management plan, including the restoration activities along the Guamote-Macas road;

• IUCN assigns high importance to the State Party’s proposal to evaluate the effects of the inclusion of the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. IUCN recommends that the scope of such an evaluation and its application be extended beyond this site and include other sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. IUCN is of the view that a series of such evaluations could contribute to changing the negative perceptions associated with the inclusion of sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee commended the State Party’s positive and constructive approach to the inclusion of this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger and using the Committee’s decision to increase international support for the conservation of the site. The Committee commended the support of the Government of the Netherlands to the conservation of this site and invited donors to assign high priority to support projects to strengthen conservation of World Heritage sites in Danger. Furthermore, the Committee, in accordance with the suggestion of the State Party that has been endorsed by IUCN, called for evaluations of the impacts of the inclusion of Sangay and other natural properties in the List of World Heritage in Danger. Such an evaluation could provide lessons for the future and highlight the instrumental role of the Danger Listing in enhancing the conservation of sites.

 

X.6 Simen National Park (Ethiopia)

The Committee noted with concern that the Centre has not yet received a response from the State Party to the letter transmitting the observations and recommendations of the twenty-third session of the Bureau (5 – 10 July 1999). IUCN had requested to consult with relevant authorities, particularly those in Bahir Dar, who disagreed with the decision of the twentieth session of the Committee (Merida, Mexico, 1996) to include Simen in the List of World Heritage in Danger. IUCN has not yet received any response to its requests in this regard. The lack of any written response from the State Party to repeated communications from the Bureau and the Committee had been a continuing constraint to updating information on the state of conservation of this property and for planning measures for its rehabilitation.

In a letter dated 28 October 1999 to the Director of the Centre, the Secretary General of the Ethiopian National Agency for UNESCO has:

• Thanked the Centre for the unreserved concern and efforts to rehabilitate Simen;
• Pointed out that the Regional Government has rehabilitated the site and the number of Waliya Ibex has increased to 550 and that the numbers of other animals are on the rise;
• Informed the Centre that studies are underway for finding solutions to settlements around the Park and that 75% of the work has been completed and that analyses will be finalised and the results and recommendations made available soon; and
• Requested that UNESCO consider removing the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger, given the high priority assigned to its conservation by the Regional authorities.

During a meeting between the Centre and a staff member of the UNESCO Office in Addis Ababa it was agreed that a site visit may be planned by a UNESCO team comprising staff from the Addis Ababa Office and the Centre to explain to the regional authorities the significance of the inclusion of Simen in the List of World Heritage in Danger and possible ways in which the Committee could assist in the rehabilitation efforts in and around Simen

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee recommended that the Chairperson undertake a mission to Ethiopia to meet relevant national and regional authorities and to re-establish a basis for regular exchange of formal communications between the State Party and the Committee, Centre and IUCN for monitoring the state of conservation of the property and mitigating threats to its integrity. The Committee requested that the Centre consult with the Permanent Delegation of Ethiopia to UNESCO as well as the UNESCO Office in Addis Ababa to study the need for a UNESCO mission to the Bahir Dar Region and the site in order to prepare the work and negotiations to be undertaken by the Chairperson of the Committee.

 

X.7 Mount Nimba Nature Reserve (Guinea/Cote d'Ivoire)

The Director-General of the Centre for Environmental Management of Mount Nimba (CEGEN), via his letter of 21 September 1999, has informed the Centre that the Government of Guinea created the CEGEN in 1995. It continues to explore the feasibility for exploiting the mine immediately adjacent to Mt. Nimba in a manner that would respect the integrity of the World Heritage site. The Government of Guinea, through CEGEN, has over the last few months entered into negotiations with UNDP and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to finance a project to protect of Mount Nimba and for the integrated development of its surrounding areas. The project is being conceived within the framework of a sustainable development programme that would integrate the mining project as the motor for enhancing the economic growth of the whole region. The study phase of the project was due to commence in October and the project is financially supported by the French part of the GEF and USAID. The Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research has also, via its letter of 20 September 1999, pointed out to the Centre that the dissolution of the Mining Company of Mt. Nimba (i.e. NIMCO), mentioned in the report of the last session of the Committee (Kyoto, Japan, 1998) is incorrect. According to the letter of the Ministry, NIMCO was never dissolved.

CEGEN has confirmed that over the last fifteen months the Ministry of Mines, Geology and the Environment has been trying to re-launch the project to exploit the iron-ore mine near Mt. Nimba. The Ministry is continuing negotiations with industry partners with a view to concluding an agreement before the end of 1999. Furthermore, the Director General of CEGEN has noted that CEGEN has been associated with the elaboration of an environmental agreement with potential investors of the mining project. The attachment to the letter from the CEGEN includes several articles of the agreement that is being elaborated. The agreement calls upon the two parties (i.e. the Guinean Government and the investors) to recognise that the mining area is adjacent to the core zone of the Mt. Nimba Biosphere Reserve which is inscribed on the World Heritage List. The two parties shall take all measures to protect the environment and, in particular, the World Heritage area, and re-affirm their commitment to follow the eighteen recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee in 1993. Furthermore, the two parties will invite the involvement of all international (i.e. World Heritage Centre, UNDP, UNEP and IUCN) and non-governmental organisations that participated in discussions that led to the revision of the boundaries of the World Heritage site in the elaboration of the agreement. CEGEN has pointed out that it is obligatory that the agreement be signed before the feasibility study for the mining project is finalised. The Director General of the CEGEN believes that the implementation of the mining project would help set up an International Foundation for Mt. Nimba.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee took note of the fact that, contrary to the reports submitted at its last session in 1998, the National Mining Company has not been dissolved and that the Ministry of Mines, Geology and the Environment is still undertaking negotiations with potential investors for beginning mining operations. However, the Committee recognised the efforts of CEGEN to establish an environmental agreement which investors interested in exploiting the mine would be required to sign before finalising the feasibility study of the mining project. It also welcomed CEGEN’s intention to invite UNESCO, IUCN and other international agencies to participate in the elaboration of the agreement. Nevertheless, the Committee reiterated its recommendation made at its last session, that Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire invite the IUCN Regional Office for West Africa in Burkina Faso to undertake a site visit and prepare a detailed state of conservation report. This should include the future of the mining project and implications for the conservation of the site, and be submitted to the Committee at its twenty-fourth session in the year 2000.

 

X.8 Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras)

The Committee was informed that the State Party has not yet responded to the recommendation of the last session of the Committee (Kyoto, Japan, 1998), reiterated by the twenty-third ordinary session of the Bureau held from 5 to 10 July 1999, to invite an IUCN/Centre mission to the site. IUCN has informed the Centre that some reports it has received question whether the Patuca II hydro power project will get approval for its implementation. The damage caused by Hurricane Mitch in 1998 appears to have revived concerns over the ecological vulnerability of the area where the hydro-power project has been proposed and raised doubts regarding the feasibility of the project’s implementation. An EIA of the Patuca II project has been carried out but it has been criticized by a number of national NGOs and local people’s organizations. Nevertheless, the National Enterprise on Electric Energy continues to stress the need for Patuca II and has even begun to speculate on the possibility of a Patuca III project. IUCN also informed the Committee that logging and illegal grazing by domestic stock are also issues that need to be addressed by the authorities concerned.

The Committee retained this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee requested the Centre to contact the State Party and obtain detailed information on the Patuca II project, including a copy of the EIA that has been prepared. Furthermore, the Committee reiterated its request made at its last session in Kyoto (1998) that the State Party consider inviting a Centre/IUCN mission to the site.

 

X.9 Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India)

The Committee was informed that, as requested by the twenty-third ordinary session of the Bureau (5-10 July 1999), IUCN has reviewed the justifications, provided by Indian authorities, to the budgetary revisions for the utilization of the US$ 70,000 of the US$ 90,000 approved by the twenty-first session of the Committee (Naples, Italy, 1997). The US$ 70,000 was originally intended for the reconstruction of guard camps and staff residential facilities destroyed during the Bodo militancy from 1989 to 1992. The revisions proposed suggested that the construction of guard camps be restricted to parts of the Sanctuary where security conditions had sufficiently improved. The site management had proposed to use the savings made from reducing the number of construction activities foreseen for outreach activities, such as the organization of veterinary and health camps, repair of existing irrigation facilities etc., that directly benefit villagers. These activities are considered critical by the site management for continuously improving the relationship between staff and local villagers. As advised by IUCN, the Centre has accepted these budgetary revisions and implementation of the project has been accelerated.

IUCN had also reviewed the state of conservation report on this site provided by the State Party as attachment to its letter of 21 June 1999 to the Centre. IUCN has noted several positive developments brought about by the implementation of the rehabilitation plan agreed upon by the State Party and the Bureau in 1997. For example, the Nansbari Range Headquarters as well as the Directorate Headquarters now contain members of the Assam Forest Protection Force who act as a rapid reaction force for patrols and surveillance operations in vulnerable areas. The site has been opened to the public since 1995 and visitor numbers are slowly increasing. Ecological damage to the habitats of the site during the Bodo militancy has been negligible and large mammal populations are expected to return to pre-1989 levels over the next few years. However, the restoration of site infrastructure, i.e. roads, staff accommodation etc., proceeds at a slow pace and staff training requires attention. The main problem facing the site is the alienation of local villagers. People living in the vicinity of the site are poor and depend on natural resources for their livelihood. The site management is attempting to increase outreach activities but further efforts are needed in this regard. IUCN has submitted to the Centre a recent report that indicates the intention of the Minister for the Environment and Forests to establish an armed police force to protect endangered wildlife from poachers and save forests from timber poachers. IUCN is verifying other unconfirmed reports of the take-over of parts of the Sanctuary by tribal guerillas and the withdrawal of paramilitary forces from those parts.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the State Party to co-operate with the Centre and IUCN to prepare a progress report on the implementation of the rehabilitation plan since mid-1997 for submission to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee in 2000. Such a report may include an assessment of the time needed for the satisfactory rehabilitation of the site and for the removal of this site from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

X.10 Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Niger)

The Committee was informed that the Chairperson had approved, in April 1999, US$ 20,000 for the sensitization of all stakeholders to the conservation needs of the site. The project is one of the five activities foreseen in the emergency rehabilitation plan prepared by the State Party and submitted to the twenty-third session of the Bureau in July 1999. The total cost of implementing the plan is estimated at US$ 127,000. The Bureau had endorsed the plan and recommended that the Centre and IUCN explore ways and means for financing the implementation of the rehabilitation plan, including submission of other projects for assistance from the Fund to the consideration of the Chairperson and to the twenty-third session of the Committee. Accordingly, based on requests submitted by the State Party, the Chairperson had approved, in October 1999, the following two additional requests:

• US$ 20,000 for organizing a training workshop on the protection of natural heritage for Reserve staff, border police and other agents concerned with the control of trade in wildlife products;
• US$ 12,000, under technical co-operation, for cleaning up damaged vehicles and other debris left over in rebel bases of the past (US$ 2,000) and the purchase of communication equipment for improving patrolling and surveillance capacity (US$ 10,000)

Furthermore, the Committee noted that the State Party has submitted an emergency assistance grant for a sum of US$ 75,000 for consideration by the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau. The US$ 75,000 comprised the following activities:

• purchase of a four- wheel drive vehicle to enhance surveillance capacity (US$ 25,000)
• evaluation of the impacts of rebel activities and subsequent rehabilitation measures on wildlife populations (US$ 15,000); and
• building enclosures for the protection and breeding of wild ostriches to rehabilitate population numbers to pre-rebel estimates (US$ 35,000); the site’s ostrich population dwindled to 10% of early-1990s estimates during the period of rebel activity.

Further breakdown of the US$ 15,000 requested for evaluation of impacts on wildlife populations and of the US$ 35,000 for the protection and breeding of ostriches are contained in the emergency rehabilitation plan endorsed by the twenty-third ordinary session of the Bureau in July 1999. (Please refer to document WHC-99/CONF.204/INF.12 of that session). Since the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau had delayed the consideration of this and other international assistance requests until the Committee had decided on the budget allocations for the World Heritage Fund for 2000, the Committee noted that the Bureau would have to consider this request at a special session to be held during the remaining days of its twenty-third session. However, the Committee noted that, if the Bureau approved this emergency assistance grant, then the World Heritage Fund would have financed all activities included in the rehabilitation plan within a period of one year. In addition, the Committee was pleased to note IUCN’s efforts to co-operate with the State Party under the terms of an MOU to ensure co-ordination and co-operation among donors such as the GEF, SDC (Swiss Development Corporation) and the DANIDA (Danish International Development Agency) in supporting projects for the long-term conservation of the site and the sustainable development of surrounding regions.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the State Party to provide a progress report on the implementation of the rehabilitation plan to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee in 2000, including its views on when this site could be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger,

 

X.11 Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia)

The Committee was informed that the Bureau, at its twenty-third ordinary session in July 1999, agreed with the recommendations of a joint IUCN/Ramsar/Centre mission to the site, undertaken in February 1999, in accordance with the wish of Bureau and the Committee expressed at their respective sessions in 1998. The Bureau had welcomed the suggestion of the mission team that the State Party include, in its threat mitigation status report to the twenty-third session of the Committee, definitions of current and expected values for a set of indicators, e.g. water salinity levels, counts of selected numbers of endangered species of birds, the availability of preferred food plants etc., that could provide the basis for a 5-year monitoring programme for the implementation of the rehabilitation plan from 2000 to 2004. The Committee took note of the threat mitigation status report submitted by the State Party in document WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.9. As suggested by the twenty-third ordinary session of the Bureau, and in response to the suggestions made by IUCN during the deliberations of the Committee, the representative of the State Party pointed out that the threat mitigation report has defined some possible parameters that could be useful in monitoring the success of restoration efforts. However, he was willing to discuss with IUCN to mutually agree upon a final set of indicative parameters and to set target values of those parameters that the 5-year restoration effort may endeavour to reach. He pointed out the positive progress that had taken place lately and which had not been reflected in the report. He also stressed his Government’s commitment to consider the requirements for Ichkeul Lake during the planning of the utilisation of the water from the Sidi E Barrak dam.

The Delegate of Morocco noted the difficulties in reverting to the "original ecological conditions" of the Ichkeul Lake which restoration efforts may wish to achieve, particularly in light of the crucial rôle that the waters of the Lake play in meeting several development needs of the surrounding areas. The Representative of IUCN, while noting the statement of the Delegate of Morocco, stressed the need to set rigorous targets for parameters that are to be used for monitoring the success in restoration efforts implemented by the State Party. IUCN also called for a specific institutional strategy to coordinate the conservation of Ichkeul and the sustainable use of its water resources.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the State Party, the Centre and IUCN to discuss the threat mitigation report in detail and agree on a set of parameters, frequency of monitoring and the target range of values for each of the selected parameters that could be considered as success of restoration efforts at the end of the 5-year monitoring programme. The Committee invited the Centre and IUCN to report on the outcome of their discussions with the State Party to the twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau in mid-2000. In addition, the Committee invited the State Party to submit its first progress report of the 5-year monitoring cycle to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee at the end of the year 2000.

 

X.12 Everglades National Park (United States of America)

The Committee recalled that at its last session it had requested the State Party to submit an up-to-date state of conservation report on the site, including proposed action being taken by the State Party to determine impacts of rehabilitation measures on the integrity of the site and plans for the eventual removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Observer of the United States of America regretted the delay in the submission of the report requested by the last session of the Committee but informed the Committee that the report was expected to be received during the week of the Committee’s deliberations. He said that the delay was partly due to the State Party’s efforts to provide a detailed analysis of the impact of mitigation measures and derive a process and a plan for the possible removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Observer, however, informed the Committee that his Government was of the view that although most threats to the integrity of the site were being effectively mitigated, at present the site needs to be retained in the List of World Heritage in Danger pending the review of the report requested by the Committee.

The Committee decided to retain the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the State Party to submit the report to the Centre as soon as possible and IUCN to undertake a thorough review of the report and submit its findings and recommendations to the twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau in mid-2000.

 

X.13 Yellowstone National Park (United States of America)

The Committee recalled that at its last session it had requested the State Party to submit an up-to-date state of conservation report on the site. This should include proposed measures being taken by the State Party to determine impacts of rehabilitation measures on the integrity of the site and plans for the eventual removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Observer of the United States of America regretted the delay in the submission of the report requested by the last session of the Committee but informed the Committee that the report was expected to be received during the week of the Committee’s deliberations. He said that the delay was partly due to the State Party’s efforts to provide a detailed analysis of the impact of mitigation measures and derive a process and a plan for the possible removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Observer, however, informed the Committee that his Government was of the view that although most threats to the integrity of the site were being effectively mitigated, at present the site needs to be retained in the List of World Heritage in Danger pending the review of the report requested by the Committee.

The Committee decided to retain the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee invited the State Party to submit the report to the Centre as soon as possible and IUCN to undertake a thorough review of the report and submit its findings and recommendations to the twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau in mid-2000. The Committee noted that the State Party provided the reports on Yellowstone and Everglades National Parks on 1 December 1999 to the World Heritage Centre.

 

CULTURAL HERITAGE

 

X.14 Butrint (Albania)

In response to the UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation assessment mission (October 1997), the Government of Albania has taken important decisions to strengthen management, planning and protection for the site. In August 1998, it created the Office for the World Heritage site of Butrint, for the co-ordination and implementation of actions at Butrint. In June 1999, it declared the surroundings of Butrint as a "National Park" in order to prevent illegal and inadequate developments; it is foreseen that the extended area will be incorporated in an even bigger Butrint Park. The Government, in collaboration with the Butrint Foundation, is developing a Master Plan for the extended site and specific research has been undertaken on the preservation of the baptistery. Finally, in July 1999, the Government submitted a request for the extension of the World Heritage site for examination by the Committee at its twenty-third session.

The Secretariat presented a report on the implementation of the emergency assistance of US$ 100,000. This assistance had been committed for more than fifty percent and additional proposals had been submitted by the State Party.

The Committee took note of the progress made in the implementation of the programme of corrective measures for the World Heritage site of Butrint. It commended the Government of Albania for its important decisions to expand the protected area and to introduce institutional, management and planning arrangements for the site. It particularly welcomed the proposal for the extension of the World Heritage site.

The Committee encouraged the State Party to pursue the implementation of the programme of corrective measures in response to the recommendations made by the UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation mission under the World Heritage Emergency Assistance allocated by the Committee at its twenty-first session.

The Committee decided to retain the property in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

X.15 Angkor, Cambodia

The Secretariat reported on the results of the International Co-ordination Committee for the Safeguarding and Development of the Historic Area of Angkor (ICC) which convened its plenary session in June 1999. The Committee’s attention was drawn to the decision taken by the Royal Government of Cambodia to grant to a private company the collection of entry fees to Angkor Park for a five-year period, and the allocation in 1999 of US$ 800,000 by this company to the Authority for the Protection of the Site and Development of the Region of Angkor (ASPARA) for conservation activities. The Committee noted the report submitted by the State Party on the reorganization of APSARA and that some one hundred projects are being implemented by more than a dozen countries and agencies, including large-scale infrastructural projects such as road and bridge constructions, airport extension and public utilities upgrading of the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA) and other bilateral and multilateral financial and development co-operation agencies, as well as privately-funded projects, notably for the construction of tourism facilities. To ensure that such works, necessary for the socio-economic welfare of the population, do not undermine the World Heritage value of the site, the Committee requested the strengthening of international co-ordination efforts by APSARA and the ICC to review all public and private works affecting the site in addition to the monumental conservation projects. Recalling paragraph 56 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World heritage Convention, the State Party was invited to inform the Committee through the Secretariat, of major restorations or new constructions which they intend to undertake or to authorize which may affect the World Heritage values of the site, before the drafting of basic documents of the specific projects and before granting authorization.

As a management tool to record and monitor the various development works, the updating of the Geographical Information System (GIS) of Angkor developed in 1993, and to make this consolidated data available to all concerned parties was proposed.

Concerning the conservation projects, the Committee, while expressing appreciation for the high quality of the standards applied in the on-going projects, stressed the necessity to ensure the transfer of knowledge and skills to the national and local experts through training. In this regard, ICCROM, recognized by the Committee as the principal partner for training in cultural heritage conservation, reiterated its readiness to evaluate the training aspects of the on-going projects and to improve, as appropriate, the effectiveness of such endeavours.

The Committee furthermore expressed its deep concern over the alarming reports on the continued looting and illicit traffic of cultural properties in Angkor and other cultural sites on the Tentative list of Cambodia. The Committee urged the State Party to take further action to enhance the protection of the site against looting and the national frontiers against illicit export of cultural properties and requested the signatories of the 1970 Convention to take all measures possible to prevent the importation and sales of Khmer cultural objects of uncertain provenance.

The Observer of Indonesia informed the Committee of his Government’s assistance to the State Party to enhance the technical capacity of the conservation laboratories in Angkor through training activities.

The Observer of Japan, expressing his Government’s wish to continue to co-chair the ICC alongside the Government of France, informed the Committee of the commitment of the Japanese Government to continue providing financial assistance to Angkor.

The Observer of the United States of America informing the Committee of its recent accession to the 1970 Convention, stated its commitment to strengthen measures restricting the importation into the United States of Cambodian cultural heritage.

The Committee adopted the following decision:

The Committee decided to retain this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee, after having examined the report on the state of conservation of the site, congratulated the Royal Government of Cambodia for the significant progress made in the funding and reorganization of the Authority for the Protection of the Site and Development of the Region of Angkor (ASPARA). The Committee encouraged the ASPARA to strengthen its action in the field of training so as to ensure control over the ongoing restoration and maintenance of the monuments and the protection of the site against looting and illicit traffic of cultural objects. It invited ASPARA and the ICC to monitor closely the rapid development of the activities and collections of the International Centre for Scientific and Technical Documentation for Angkor, which should in due course house all the documentation produced by the safeguarding and development projects of the site. The Committee requested the State Party to prepare an updated state of conservation report with support of the UNESCO Office in Phnom Penh and the Division of Cultural Heritage of UNESCO of the actions being undertaken in addressing the concerns expressed above. The Committee invited the Chairperson of the Committee to write to the Co-Chairpersons of the ICC requesting them to assist the State Party in the preparation of this report. This report should include information concerning the on-going and planned major public and private works in the region of Angkor, as well as the status of measures being undertaken at the national and local levels to control looting and illicit traffic of cultural properties from Angkor and other sites on the Tentative List of Cambodia. The Committee requested that this report be provided to the Secretariat by 15 April 2000 for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fourth session.

 

X.16 Bahla Fort (Oman)

The Secretariat reported that monitoring missions were proceeding regularly and covered the preparation of the management plan of the site and of the surrounding oasis. Restoration works were entirely financed by the Omani Government that, since 1993, invested an amount of more than six million US dollars.

The Mining Museum in Bochum, Germany, provided photogrammetric records of the Fort that are indispensable for the restoration work.

The Committee thanked the State Party for its decision to finance the monitoring missions and the full cost of the restoration activities. The Committee requested the State Party and the Centre to explore ways and means to accelerate the pace of implementation of the restoration programme.

The Committee, furthermore, recalled that the Bureau at its twenty-third session had decided to evaluate the progress after two years in order to assess if it can recommend the Committee to delete the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee decided to retain the property in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

X.17 Chan Chan Archaeological Zone (Peru)

The Secretariat informed the Committee that it had received, some ten days before the Committee session, a copy of the very extensive and recently completed Master Plan for the site. This plan was prepared by an interdisciplinary group of experts with assistance from the World Heritage Fund. The Secretariat also reported that at the time of the meeting, the Second Pan-America Course on the Conservation and Management of Earthen Architectural and Archaeological Heritage (Government of Peru, ICCROM, CRATerre EAG, Getty Conservation Institute) was being held in Chan Chan and that this course would directly benefit the preservation and management planning for the site.

The Observer of Peru thanked the Committee for the support it had allocated to the preservation of the site and for the preparation of its Master Plan. She announced that the President of her country would sign, within the next days, the Decree that would formally adopt the Master Plan and that the Management Unit had started its work already to obtain funding for its implementation. She said that periodic reports on the progress would be submitted to the World Heritage Committee.

The Committee congratulated the Government of Peru for the accomplishment of the preparation of the Master Plan and encouraged the State Party to implement it. It requested ICOMOS and ICCROM to examine the Master Plan and to present their observations to the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session.

It requested the State Party to submit a progress report on the implementation of the Master Plan by 15 September 2000 for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fourth session.

The Committee decided to retain the property in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

B.REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

X.18 The Bureau at its twenty-third extraordinary session (November 1999) examined the state of conservation of sixty-six properties inscribed on the World Heritage List (thirty natural, four mixed and thirty-two cultural properties). The extensive deliberations and recommendations of the Bureau in November 1999 were included in the report of the session that was made available to the Committee as Working Document WHC-99/CONF.209/6. The relevant section of the report of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau is attached as Annex VIII.

X.19 The Committee examined the state of conservation of twenty-one properties and noted the decisions of the Bureau on the remaining forty-five properties. The following section reflects the discussions that actually took place during the Committee session as well as the decisions that were taken by the Committee.

 

NATURAL HERITAGE

i)Natural properties which the Committee inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

 

X.20 Iguaçu National Park (Brazil)

The Committee noted that an IUCN/UNESCO mission was carried out to this site in March 1999 and that the results were presented to the July 1999 Bureau session. The mission report dealt with four issues relevant to the integrity of this World Heritage site: The Colon road, helicopter flights, dams on the Iguaçu River, and management planning. The Committee noted that the Bureau, at its twenty-third extraordinary session, examined the issues and progress made and recommended inscription of this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee recognized the efforts made by the State Party to implement the recommendations of the mission. However, in the absence of satisfactory progress with regard to the permanent closure of the road and the implementation of the recovery plan, the Committee decided to include Iguacu National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

X.21 Salonga National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC))

The Committee noted that the heightened levels of threats due to poaching and illegal encroachments as well as the conditions which led the Bureau at its July session to recommend that the Committee inscribe this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger still prevail.

The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to extend to Salonga the co-operation with the conservation NGOs, ICCN and other partners, targeted to raise international awareness and support for four other World Heritage sites in Danger in the DRC (Garamba, Virunga and Kahuzi Biega National Parks and the Okapi Faunal Reserve). They should also explore ways and means to strengthen the conservation and management of Salonga National Park. The Committee decided to inscribe Salonga National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

X.22 Rwenzori Mountains (Uganda)

The Committee noted the reports on lack of resources, suspension of projects and serious security issues at the Park and that a greater part of the Park is not monitored by Park staff. The Committee also noted that the Bureau at its twenty-third session, examined the issues and recommended inscription of this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee expressed its serious concerns regarding the security situation at this site. The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to work closely with the Uganda Wildlife Authority. Communication with conservation NGOs and other international organizations present in the region, to discuss ways and means to publicize the need for all parties involved in the conflict in the region to respect the site’s World Heritage status and to develop projects to support site management should be seeked. The Committee decided to inscribe Rwenzori Mountains in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

ii)State of conservation reports of natural properties examined by the Committee

 

X.23 Great Barrier Reef (Australia)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee noted progress reported on the "Focused Recommendations" and the "Framework for management" relating to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area (GBRWHA) at the twenty-third and the twenty-third extraordinary sessions of the Bureau. IUCN noted the framework for action, which has been prepared and that it concerns a long-term strategy.

The Committee accepted the "Focused Recommendations", and the "Framework for management" of the GBRWHA as a basis for monitoring the implementation of those recommendations. The Committee commended the process and the product arising from the consultative approach used in monitoring the state of conservation of the GBRWHA and recommends its adoption as an approach to other World Heritage natural properties in Australia. The Committee invited the State Party to submit progress reports on the implementation of the "Focused Recommendations" to the annual sessions of the Committee for review."

 

X.24 Comoe National Park (Côte d’Ivoire)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee noted the discussions at the twenty-third and twenty-third extraordinary sessions of the Bureau concerning illegal logging activities that are threatening the integrity of the site.

The Committee requested the State Party to consider inviting a Centre/IUCN mission to the site during the year 2000 to review threats to the integrity of the site and plan appropriate emergency rehabilitation measures. The Committee invited the State Party to co-operate with the Centre and IUCN to submit to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee, in accordance with paragraphs 86 – 90 of the Operational Guidelines, a detailed state of conservation report and corrective measures for mitigating threats to the site, to enable the Committee to consider including this property in the List of World Heritage in Danger."

 

X.25 Whale Sanctuary of El Viscaino (Mexico)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property.

The Committee noted that following its request and at the invitation of the Mexican authorities, a mission was carried out to the Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino from 23 to 28 August 1999. The full report and the recommendations of the mission were presented in Information Document WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.20.

The Secretariat introduced the report and the main findings of the mission. The issues were found to be extremely complex and could certainly not be reduced to a concern about one species or event. In fact, the team specifically considered a variety of issues including the management structure, the integrity of the site, status of the whale population, salt production, sustainable use and tourism. The World Heritage area, composed of the two lagoons Ojo de Liebre and San Ignacio, retains its quality and significance as a largely natural habitat and fulfils the criteria and conditions of integrity for which it was inscribed in 1993. The Committee was informed that the mission invited the Mexican Government to take fully into account the World Heritage values of the site when evaluating the proposed salt facility at San Ignacio. This evaluation would include not only the population of grey whales and other wildlife but also the integrity of the landscape and the ecosystem.

IUCN informed that it participated in the UNESCO mission and that the technical report is comprehensive and credible. IUCN supports the efforts of the Mexican Government in protecting the site, and in particular in relation to capacity building efforts and the involvement of local people and highlighted a number of specific recommendations in the report. IUCN indicated that the current salt production activities at Ojo de Liebre Lagoon do not impact the grey whale population. IUCN commented that should there be any change to the existing situation at this site, the position of IUCN would be reviewed.

The Delegate of Canada agreed with the conclusions of the mission and congratulated the Government of Mexico for its protection effort. He stated his concerns about potential damage to the site in the event of a new major industrial development and encouraged the State Party to take the World Heritage values fully into account, in particular concerning all measures taken to protect this World Heritage site.

The Delegate of Belgium noted the interest of the public and that the wider public should therefore be informed of the developments concerning this question.

The Chairperson noted the forward-looking decision and his confidence in the State Party to fully protect the site. At present, there are no concerns, as stated in the report. He informed the Committee that he himself had met with the representatives from the NGOs to listen to their views. The Chairperson ensured that the Committee will fully co-operate with the State Party and if any changes to the current state of conservation should occur, he would contact the relevant authorities.

The Delegate of Mexico thanked the Chairperson for his words. He expressed his gratitude to the World Heritage Committee and underlined the involvement of all interested parties. He quoted from the report: "The mission team was impressed by the present condition of the site as a whole and appreciated the ongoing efforts by local people, the staff of the Biosphere Reserve, Exportadora de Sal (ESSA) and governmental regulators to maintain and enhance the integrity of the site. In particular, the team was reassured about the conservation status of grey whales and wished to emphasize the importance of Mexico’s demonstrated commitment to population monitoring, scientific research, and habitat protection for this flagship species of the World Heritage site." The Mexican Government endorsed the recommendations and informed the Committee that actions have been already taken, in particular with regard to the voluntary audit and the diversification of tourism. Finally, he emphasized that the Government of Mexico reaffirms its political will to maintain and enhance its co-operation with the World Heritage Committee to preserve the exceptional values of El Vizcaino.

Following these discussions the Committee adopted the following:

"The Committee took note of the report of the mission and the full set of recommendations as indicated in WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.20. The Committee noted that the World Heritage site under present circumstances is not in danger, and scientific data show that the whale population is not endangered and continues to increase. However, if any significant change to the present situation should occur, documented by appropriate evidence, the conclusion concerning the site’s status under the World Heritage Convention should be promptly re-evaluated in co-operation and co-ordination with the State Party, and appropriate consideration should be given to this new information by all relevant Parties and the World Heritage Committee."

The Chairperson thanked the State Party for its collaboration and the Committee for the debate.

 

X.26 Doñana National Park (Spain)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee noted that during 1998 and 1999 a number of actions were undertaken to mitigate the impacts of the ecological disaster following the spill in April 1998, in particular the results of the International Expert Meeting on the Regeneration of the Doñana Watershed in October 1999 with the participation of the World Heritage Centre, IUCN, the Secretary-General of the Ramsar Convention, WWF and other organizations.

The Committee commended the Spanish authorities for the continued clean up effort of the Guadiamar Basin and affected areas. However, the Committee expressed its concerns for the re-opening of the mine without taking into account the points raised by the twenty-second session of the Committee and the twenty-third session of the Bureau. The Committee suggested that a review meeting be held during the year 2000/2001 to review progress of the implementation of the Doñana 2005 project, taking into account the points raised by IUCN and involving all concerned parties and institutions including the international collaborators from the meeting on Doñana 2005 held in October 1999. The State Party is encouraged to take into account the WCPA Position Statement on mining activities and protected areas, which was reviewed by this Committee."

 

X.27 St. Kilda (United Kingdom)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

The Committee noted that a round table meeting on the state of conservation of the site was held in Edinburgh on 24 September 1999 with the participation of a representative from IUCN/WCPA and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre.

IUCN underlined that it does not recommend that this site be placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Delegate of Portugal highlighted comments made by the Observer of France at the Bureau session, namely the issue of economic development at maritime sites. He underlined that this applies to coastal areas in general. A technical meeting could be organized on the problems of tourism and economic development in coastal areas and he recommended the involvement of the International Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to start a dialogue on these issues.

Following the discussion, the Committee decided the following:

"The Committee noted the results of the St. Kilda Round Table of September 1999. The Committee recommended (1) that the boundaries of the World Heritage area should be expanded to include the surrounding marine area and consideration be given to a buffer zone as was recommended in the IUCN’s original evaluation in 1986; (2) that a revised management plan should be prepared. The Committee also recommended that, until the management plan and the risk assessment of any proposed development that might affect the integrity of the site had been prepared, consideration be given to placing a moratorium on oil licensing nearer to St Kilda other than that already licensed. The Committee decided not to include the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger."

The Observer of the United Kingdom informed the Committee that his Government would be happy to respond to the Committee’s request.

(iii)State of conservation reports of natural properties noted by the Committee

X.28 The Committee noted the decisions of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau as reflected in the Report of the Bureau session (Working Document WHC-99/CONF.209/6) included as Annex VIII to this report. Additional observations made during the Committee session are reflected below.

Shark Bay, Western Australia (Australia)
Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia)

Heard and McDonald Islands (Australia)

The Delegate of Australia thanked IUCN for the consultative process started, which could be a model for other State Parties. He also informed the Committee that the area of marine protection around Macquerie Island had been extended and now comprises 16 million ha, the world’s largest highly protected marine zone.

Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland)
Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon)

Los Katios National Park (Colombia)

The Delegate of Colombia informed the Committee that a visit by a delegation from the Ministry for Environment to Los Katios was recently carried out. The visit included areas that were previously not accessible. He emphasized that the proposal to grant collective land ownership over 100,000ha would be outside the Park in the buffer zone. He commented that his Government would be pleased to receive the visit of the monitoring mission to this site in 2000. The Colombian authorities have enhanced transboundary co-operation with Darien National Park (Panama) and strengthened the protected area system.

Morne Trois Pitons National Park (Dominica)

Galapagos Islands (Ecuador)

The Observer of the United States underlined his Government’s role in safeguarding Galapagos Islands and congratulated the Government of Ecuador on progress made. He noted the landmark decision of the Galapagos Law and questioned whether it had been implemented, in particular concerning the forty-mile zone.

The Secretariat informed the Committee that some threats related to illegal fishing have been reported. IUCN noted the implementation of this pioneering legislation is vital and specific regulations need to be developed and implemented as soon as possible.

The Delegate of Ecuador provided information from the Ministry of Environment noting progress concerning control of introduced species and general improvements in relation to biodiversity conservation at the site. Concerning the control of the 40-mile zone, she stated that the law has not yet been implemented, but that the basis for the conservation and environmental control is there. She thanked the Committee for all its efforts to safeguard the Galapagos.

Kaziranga National Park (India)
Komodo National Park (Indonesia)
Mount Kenya National Park (Kenya)

Sagarmatha National Park (Nepal)

The Observer of Nepal expressed his gratitude for the international support for the important project on tourism carried out at Sagarmatha National Park. The Observer of the United Kingdom noted that it is a ground-breaking project.

Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand (New Zealand)

Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman)

The Delegate of Thailand noted the raised serious concerns raised by the Bureau regarding the management of this site, given the decline in numbers of the Arabian Oryx and the fact that the boundary marking and management planning is long overdue for completion. He recalled that the Committee inscribed the site without legislation and management plan in December 1994. He highlighted the Operational Guidelines in relation to the deletion of properties. The Delegate of Benin noted that rigour was not always applied in the past years and that a number of sites would not have been accepted if they were presented today. Concerning the question of deletion, a site would be put first on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Delegate of Thailand made it clear that he had not proposed the deletion of the site from the World Heritage List and that he was totally aware of the modalities in that respect. The Observer of the United Kingdom noted that similar problems concerned a number of sites and that these issues would certainly be dealt with by the periodic reporting process. IUCN pointed out that it had consistently raised concerns about this site. IUCN noted that legislation does not have effect if there is not sufficient resources for its implementation. The Chairperson reminded the Committee members about the rarity of Arab natural sites on the List.

In concluding, the Chairperson thanked the Committee for the debate and noted that awareness needs to be raised in countries about the World Heritage Convention, its obligations and World Heritage values to be preserved for future generations, in particular among decision-makers. He thanked the Delegate of Thailand for his statement and encouraged the Committee to further reflect on how to enhance the protection of World Heritage sites.

Huascaran National Park (Peru)

Lake Baikal (Russian Federation)

The Observer of Russia requested that the information provided during the adoption of the report of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on this site be included in the Bureau report.

Bwindi Impenetrable Forest (Uganda)
Gough Island (United Kingdom)
Ngorongoro Conservation Area and the Serengeti National Park (United Republic of Tanzania)
Canaima National Park (Venezuela)
Ha Long Bay (Vietnam)

Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)

 

MIXED (NATURAL AND CULTURAL) HERITAGE

(i)Mixed properties which the Committee inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

The Committee did not inscribe any mixed sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

(ii)State of conservation reports of mixed properties examined by the Committee

X.29 Tasmanian Wilderness (Australia)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee requested the Australian Committee for IUCN (ACIUCN) to complete its review process on the state of conservation of the Tasmanian Wilderness with the aim of submitting an up-to-date report to the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau in 2000. ACIUCN's review should include reference to any continuing concerns, such as those noted at the twenty-third ordinary session of the Bureau, and suggestions relating to any future extension of the World Heritage property and the management of areas of the dedicated Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) reserve system which have been previously identified as having World Heritage value.

The Committee commended the State Party for the recent completion of the 1999 Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Management Plan, and recommended that its effectiveness be regularly monitored over time."

X.30 Mount Emei Scenic Area, including Leshan Giant Buddha Scenic Area (China)

The Committee recalled the report from the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee requested the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, before 15 April 2000, a state of conservation report on developments at "Mount Emei Scenic Area, including Leshan Giant Buddha Scenic Area."

X.31 Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee, having examined the report of the World Heritage Centre-IUCN-ICOMOS mission to the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (made available to the Committee as Information Document WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.21), endorsed the conclusions and recommendations contained in it.

The Committee congratulated the Government of Peru on the adoption of the Master Plan and the establishment of the Management Unit. It urged the Government of Peru to ensure that all institutions, authorities and agencies involved in the Sanctuary give their full support to the Management Unit for the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu so that this unit can effectively and efficiently fulfil the tasks entrusted to it.

The Committee recognized that there is strong tourism pressure on the site and that the studies proposed in recommendations 6, 7 and 8 of the mission report would allow this matter to be addressed in an integrated manner.

The Committee requested the Government of Peru to submit, by 15 April 2000 for transmission to and examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session, a report that should include its response to the mission’s conclusions and recommendations, as well as information on the progress made in the preparation and execution of operational plans for the implementation of the Master Plan for the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu."

(iii)State of conservation reports of mixed properties noted by the Committee

X.32 The Committee noted the decision of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau as reflected in the Report of the Bureau session (Working Document WHC-99/CONF.209/6) and included in Annex VIII on the following property.

Kakadu National Park (Australia)

 

CULTURAL HERITAGE

(i)Cultural property which the Committee inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

 

X.33 Groups of Monuments at Hampi (India)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee examined the findings of the UNESCO reactive monitoring mission, and expressing deep concern over the partial construction of two cable-suspended bridges within the protected archaeological areas of Hampi, decided to inscribe the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

In view of the ascertained and potential dangers threatening the integrity and authenticity of the site, the Committee requested the national authorities concerned to urgently elaborate a comprehensive conservation, management and development plan, with the assistance of ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre.

The Committee requested the Government of India to report on the progress made in reducing the dangers facing the site, and in developing the comprehensive management plan, for examination by the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau."

The Observer of India expressed his Government’s appreciation to the Committee for its concern over the state of conservation of Hampi. He stated that the protection of the extraordinary site of Hampi, the result of centuries of interaction between man and nature, was no easy task. However, the Observer underlined that the integrity of Hampi, comprising approximately 40 kilometers of villages, banana fields, rice paddies, the river, rocks and monuments, must be preserved. The Observer informed that the problem of preservation of the archaeological remains was a classic example of the conflict between heritage conservation and development, and that innovative solutions would have to be found in solving this problem. The Committee was informed that the construction of the two bridges had been halted, but that corrective measures would have to be undertaken to remove the threats facing the site.

The Observer stated that the inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger would strengthen the capacity of the Archaeological Survey of India and the State Government of Karnataka in their efforts to safeguard this unique site, and will ensure its long-term protection. Finally, the Observer called upon the Committee and the World Heritage Centre for assistance to ensure the integrity of the site.

The Committee expressed its appreciation to the Government of India by acclamation.

(ii)State of conservation reports of cultural properties examined by the Committee

X.34 Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee took note of the findings of the report and recommendations of the ICOMOS-ICCROM Joint Mission, undertaken in September 1999, which examined the state of conservation, management and factors affecting the Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian. The Committee expressed appreciation to the Government of China, the advisory bodies and the Secretariat for the organization of the Joint Mission, which resulted with concrete recommendations for short and long term actions for enhanced management of the site. The Committee underlined the importance of putting into place a systematic low-cost monitoring system for the whole site, as well as the need for preparing an overall conservation and management plan.

The Committee welcomed the Government’s intention to seriously examine the Joint Mission’s recommendations, and requested the advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre to closely co-operate with the national authorities in the necessary follow-up actions. As to the Joint Mission recommendation to add criterion (iv) and remove criterion (vi) under which the site is inscribed on the World Heritage List, the Committee requested ICOMOS to examine this matter further in consultation with the State Party. The Committee requested ICOMOS to make a further recommendation for examination by the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau."

X.35 Islamic Cairo (Egypt)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee thanked the national authorities and the international community for its commitment in supporting this important and complex site. The Committee wished to remind the State Party of the need to ensure the continuity of the long-term action for the success in the safeguarding and revitalization of Islamic Cairo. It encouraged the State Party to continue its direct and indirect financial contributions to the project and to foresee the involvement of the local population in the safeguarding and revitalization programme."

States Parties thanked the Secretariat for the quality of the co-operation programme, stressing that it represents a model for urban World Heritage sites conservation and revitalization strategies.

X.36 City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta (Georgia)

The Committee recalled the report from the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee welcomed the initiative of the Government of Georgia and the Mtskheta Foundation to develop a Heritage and Tourism Master Plan for the City-Museum Reserve of Mtskheta. It expressed its full support for this initiative that will provide the appropriate framework for a coherent set of actions to be financed by different sources and donor institutions. The Committee recognized that on the middle and long-term major investments will be required for the actual implementation of the Master Plan and called upon States Parties, international institutions and organizations to collaborate in this effort.

The Committee urged the Government of Georgia to take immediate measures for the protection of the Armaztsikhe archaeological site and for the recuperation of the total area of the Samtavros Veli Necropolis site. It requested the Georgian authorities to provide the plans for the bell tower at the cathedral for further study by ICOMOS."

X.37 Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany)

The Committee recalled the report from the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee commended the German authorities for their fifth report on the state of conservation of the Parks and Palaces of Potsdam and Berlin. It acknowledged the efforts made to restrict as much as possible the negative effects of the Havel project (German Unity Project 17) on the integrity of the World Heritage site. Nevertheless, it considered that considerable threats persist to the landscape and certain historic monuments, such as the Sacrow Church and the Babelsberg Engine House.

The Committee wished to know whether it would be possible to restrict passage through the World Heritage site to standard-sized vessels and to develop the Havel Canal, which lies outside the site (the northern route) so as to permit the passage of larger vessels.

It requested the German authorities to continue its efforts to find a solution in conformity with the requirements of the World Heritage Convention. A report should be provided before 15 April 2000 in order that it may be examined by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session."

X.38 Sun Temple of Konarak (India)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee, having examined the developments at the Sun Temple of Konarak, expressed concern over its state of conservation. The Committee reiterated the Bureau’s requests to the Government of India to submit information concerning the structural study implemented with the financial assistance from the World Heritage Fund emergency assistance reserve, made available in 1998. The Committee requested the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to continue its arrangements for an urgent reactive monitoring mission, in close co-operation with the national authorities concerned. The Committee requested the findings of this ICOMOS mission, and reports submitted by the Government of India, to be submitted for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session. The Committee also requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to clarify whether or not the Government of India intends to nominate this site for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger."

X.39 Byblos (Lebanon)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee noted with satisfaction the quality of the co-operation that had been established with the Lebanese authorities and the Municipality of Byblos. It congratulated and thanked the Netherlands for its generous contribution and encouraged all parties to continue their efforts in favour of this site. The Committee requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to organise a mission to examine the state of conservation of the archaeological mound of Byblos."

X.40 Tyre (Lebanon)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee thanked the Lebanese Government for their co-operation in the preservation of the City of Tyre. In view of the serious and persistent threats to the safeguarding of the site, the Committee requested that the recommendations of the International Scientific Committee be urgently implemented, particularly the adoption of a city management plan to ensure the safeguarding of the archaeological zones as well as their protection through the creation of an appropriate landscape design in co-operation with ICOMOS, ICCROM and IFLA. The Committee also requested the authorities to appoint a national co-ordinator and open a national account for the International Safeguarding Campaign as it was agreed with UNESCO, and recalled in the letter dated 7 July 1999 from the Director-General to the Minister of Culture".

X.41 Historic Centre of Puebla (Mexico)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee thanked the Mexican authorities for the detailed report on the damages caused by the earthquake of 15 June 1999 to the World Heritage sites of the Historic Centre of Puebla and the Earliest 16th-Century Monasteries on the slopes of Popocatepetl. It commended the authorities for the immediate response given to the earthquake and the emergency measures that have been taken to prevent further damage and collapse.

The Committee requested the Mexican authorities to submit, by 15 September 2000, a report on the progress made in the consolidation of the monuments, for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fourth session."

X.42 Kathmandu Valley (Nepal)

The Secretariat, in reporting on the discussions during the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau and its recommendations, reminded the Committee that the Kathmandu Valley inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1979 is composed of seven Monument Zones. While these zones also contain built-up areas composed of traditional buildings, the boundaries of the protected areas were defined on the basis of a monumental vision, rather than with the objective of protecting a larger urban heritage. Thus, given the relatively limited number of traditional buildings in the World Heritage area, their protection is even more important in forming the essential setting within each Monument Zone. The Committee noted that in the case of Bauddhanath Monument Zone, there were approximately 88 historic buildings surrounding the stupa in 1979 that provided the setting, both physical and spiritual, of this important site of pilgrimage. In 1993 at the time of the UNESCO-ICOMOS Joint Mission, there remained 27, and despite concerted efforts in conserving the site with substantive support from the international community, only 15 remained in 1998.

During the discussions, the Committee noted that inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger has been deferred many times, in order to provide more time to apply conservation measures in accordance with the 16 Recommendations of 1993, and the 55 Recommendations and a Time-Bound Action Plan of Corrective Measures of 1998, officially adopted by HMG of Nepal. The Committee, although noting that periodic reports, submitted either by the State Party or the World Heritage Centre, examined by each session of the Bureau and Committee since 1993, demonstrated the efforts being made by the State Party, it was obliged to note the deterioration of the site in its ensemble.

ICCROM congratulated the State Party for its continuing efforts to strengthen protection of the site over the last six years, but stated that it remained deeply concerned over the apparent and increasing loss of the authentic historic fabrics of the site, which it recalled, was the reason that prompted the 1993 UNESCO-ICOMOS Joint Mission to recommend inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Representative of ICCROM stated that if the Committee is to support the recommendation of the Bureau to send a High Level Mission, the mandate of the mission should focus on:

• clarifying to the authorities at the highest level, the purpose of inscribing a site on the List of World Heritage in Danger;

• defining more precisely the conditions to be met to warrant eventual inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger in the Committee’s deliberations in year 2000;

• giving further attention to measures which can address the root causes of the demolitions of the vernacular fabrics of the Monument Zones;

• giving attention to establishing base-line data for continuing documentation of the historic buildings.

The advice given by ICCROM was supported by the Delegate of Thailand. To mitigate the real danger threatening this site, the Delegate of Hungary underlined the importance of co-operation between States Parties for enhanced urban heritage management, and in this regard, invited Nepal to participate at the Integrated Urban Conservation Training Workshop and Seminar for Central European Historic City Managers which Hungary planned to organize in 2000.

The Committee underlined that, while it had deferred inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger until its next session, it recognized the serious loss of the authentic urban fabrics detected within the site over the past years. Several members of the Bureau had been willing to inscribe the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger right away, and it was only after a working group that the Bureau had deferred the inscription. It stressed that the gravity of the situation should not be underestimated. Moreover, the Committee underscored that inscription of a site on the List of World Heritage in Danger should not be considered as an exercise of black-listing sites, but understood to serve as a conservation tool and as part of a process to draw international technical assistance and to rally the necessary political will and public support at the national level in favour of conservation.

The Observer of HMG of Nepal expressed his Government’s gratitude for the Committee’s keen interest in the protection of the site, as well as for the professional assistance provided over the years by the advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre. He reported on the Government’s efforts made in implementing the 55 Recommendations and the Time-Bound Action Plan for Corrective Measures adopted by HMG of Nepal, but stressed the difficulties faced by his Government in controlling damage in the Monument Zones. He therefore requested the Committee to consider prolonging the deadlines for implementing the Time-Bound Action Plan of Corrective Measures. The Observer informed the Committee that the Prime Minister, aware of the need for concerted national efforts beyond those being made by the Department of Archaeology, had instructed the relevant Ministries to take necessary action for enhancing the management of the site. The Observer stated that although Kathmandu Valley is a Nepalese World Heritage site, the responsibility to ensure its integrity and authenticity is also that of the international community at large and the Committee. Finally, he assured the Committee that the HMG of Nepal would welcome the High Level Mission, composed of the Chairperson of the Committee, the Director of the World Heritage Centre and international experts selected by ICOMOS.

The Committee, in conclusion, recalled the reports of the twenty-third ordinary and extraordinary session of the Bureau, and adopted the following:

"The Committee examined the state of conservation reports presented in WHC-99/CONF-209/INF.17A,B,C,D, and expressed deep concern over the serious degree of uncontrolled change and deterioration of the authenticity and integrity of the Monument Zones placed under the protection of the World Heritage Convention. It noted with appreciation that the State Party had made every effort to implement the 16 Recommendations of the 1993 UNESCO-ICOMOS Joint Mission, as well as the 55 Recommendations of the 1998 UNESCO-ICOMOS-HMG of Nepal Joint Mission and the Time-Bound Action Plan for Corrective Measures.

The Committee requested HMG of Nepal to continue making all possible efforts to protect the remaining authentic historic urban fabric within the Kathmandu Valley site. The Committee requested the Secretariat and the Advisory Bodies to continue to assist the State Party as appropriate and to the extent possible: in strengthening its capacity in controlling development, retaining historic buildings in-situ, and in correcting illegal construction and alteration of historic buildings within the Kathmandu Valley site.

The Committee decided to defer inscription of the Kathmandu Valley site on the List of World Heritage in Danger again, until the next session of the Committee.

Moreover, in view of the fact that the demolition and new construction or alterations of historic buildings within the Kathmandu Valley have persisted in spite of the concerted international and national efforts, resulting in the loss or continuous and gradual deterioration of materials, structure, ornamental features, and architectural coherence making the essential settings of the Monument Zones as well as in their authentic characters, the Committee requested a High Level Mission to be undertaken to hold discussions with representatives of HMG of Nepal in early 2000. This High Level Mission would be composed of the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee or a representative of the Committee members, a senior staff of the World Heritage Centre, and two eminent international experts selected by ICOMOS. The findings of the mission would be reported the next sessions of the Bureau and Committee, in 2000."

X.43 Taxila (Pakistan)

Fort and Shalamar Gardens of Lahore (Pakistan)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee examined the report of the Secretariat. The Committee expressed concern over the demolition of the 375-year old essential hydraulic works of the Shalamar Gardens, which had been carried out to enlarge the 4-lane Grand Trunk Road into a 6-lane motorway, as well as the completed football stadium built on the archaeological remains of Bhir Mound, the most ancient citadel site dating between 6^th BC – 2^nd AD within Taxila. In view of the ascertained threats undermining the authenticity and integrity of these two sites, the Committee requested the State Party to take urgent corrective measures to restore the hydraulic works at Shalamar Gardens, and to consider removing the football stadium negatively impacting upon the archaeological remains of Bhir Mound. The Committee requested the State Party to report on the actions taken for examination by the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau. Should the Bureau find that the World Heritage values have been compromised, it would recommend the Committee to consider inscription of these sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its twenty-fourth session, in view of the threats facing these sites.

Taking note of the need to elaborate a comprehensive management plan for both the Fort and Shalamar Gardens of Lahore, the Committee requested the World Heritage Centre to urgently organize a reactive monitoring mission by the advisory bodies to Lahore. The Committee requested that consultation on the proposals for protecting the Shish Mahal Mirrored Ceiling be undertaken by ICCROM with the national authorities, during this mission. The Committee requested the advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre to report on findings and recommendations of the mission for examination by the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau."

X.44 Central Zone of Angra do Heroismo in the Azores (Portugal)

The Committee recalled the reports from the twenty-third ordinary and the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee took note of the information provided by the State Party on the marina project in the Bay of Angra do Heroismo and the opinions expressed by ICOMOS. The Committee endorsed the views of ICOMOS regarding the proposed rehabilitation of the waterfront and urged the Portuguese authorities to take these into account in reconsidering the plans for this area, more particularly for the area of the Patio da Alfandega, Jardim dos Corte-Reais and Antigo Mercado do Peixe, the Encosta do Cantagalo and the S. Sebastiao Fort.

The Committee took note of the wish of the Portuguese authorities to continue its collaboration with ICOMOS on the further development of the plans for the marina and the waterfront and their integration into the overall urban plan for Angra do Heroismo.

It requested the authorities to submit a report on the above matters by 15 April 2000 for consideration by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session."

X.45 Complex of Hué Monuments (Vietnam)

The Committee recalled the report from the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau on the state of conservation of this property and adopted the following decision:

"The Committee examined the report of the Secretariat and expressed sympathy for the victims of the November floods and concern over the serious extent of the damage caused by the floods to the monuments and urban landscape of the Hue World Heritage site. Having examined the new information provided to the Bureau by the Vietnamese authorities and the Secretariat, the Committee allocated an initial sum of US$ 50,000 under the emergency assistance fund to support the rehabilitation of Hue and Hoi An, and the preparation of a comprehensive emergency rehabilitation programme, including risk assessment and mitigation schemes. The Committee noted the deployment of an expert mission organized by the Secretariat for early December, and requested the Centre to support the State Party in preparing the emergency rehabilitation programme and in mobilizing international co-operation.

With regard to the new focus since 1997 on urban heritage conservation, the Committee noted the efforts being made by the Provincial and Municipal Authorities of Hué and the Hué Conservation Centre in mitigating the deterioration of the historic urban fabric of the World Heritage protected areas and commends Lille Metropole, UNESCO and the French Government for the support provided to the local authorities in integrating conservation concerns in the overall urban development plan. In this regard, the Committee reiterated the importance of preserving the authenticity and integrity of the Citadel of Hué marked by its urban morphology, spatial organization and vegetation which together form the « feng shui » philosophy adopted in the original construction and subsequent transformation of this imperial city. The Committee encouraged the State Party for its initiative in organizing the donors’ meeting scheduled in April 2000 with technical support from the World Heritage Centre and Lille Metropole, and suggests that the emergency programme for the rehabilitation of the flood-caused damages be presented at this donors’ meeting in addition to the urban conservation programme. It suggested, furthermore, that the project proposals be forwarded in advance to the members of the Committee, and that invitations be extended to the Committee and advisory bodies, as well as to the international development co-operation agencies and Vietnam-based diplomatic missions. Finally, the Committee noted that the written report that the Bureau at its twenty-second session requested the State Party to submit by 15 September 1999, had not been received to date. The Committee therefore requested the State Party to prepare an initial progress report on the rehabilitation effort, as well as on measures taken to ensure the conservation and appropriate development of the urban heritage of Hué by 1 May 2000 for review by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session."

(iii)State of conservation reports of cultural properties noted by the Committee

X.46 The Committee noted the decisions of the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau as reflected in the Report of the Bureau session (Working Document WHC-99/CONF.209/6) and included in Annex VIII of this report on the following properties:

Jesuit Missions of the Guaranis (Argentina and Brazil):
The Jesuit Mission of Santa Ana (Argentina)
The Potala Palace, Lhasa (China)
City of Quito (Ecuador)

The Delegate of Ecuador informed the Committee that the volcano Pichincha had erupted on 5 October and November 26 1999 and that the National Institute for Cultural Heritage (INPC) and the Municipality of Quito had taken preventive measures to protect the population and the monuments.

Historic Centre of Tallin (Estonia)
Mont-Saint-Michel and its Bay (France)
Roman Monuments, Cathedral and Liebfrauen Church in Trier (Germany)
Ashanti Traditional Buildings (Ghana)
Churches and Convents of Goa (India)
Luang Prabang (Laos)
Island of Mozambique (Mozambique)
Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)

The Observer of HMG of Nepal assured the Committee that the conservation of the Maya Devi Temple would be undertaken following international conservation norms prescribed by the World Heritage Convention. He informed the Committee that HMG of Nepal would be grateful to receive expert suggestions from UNESCO concerning the draft conceptual design for the Maya Devi Temple conservation work, as such advice would be a guideline for elaborating the details of the design under preparation. The Observer assured the Committee that the designs for the works at Maya Devi Temple, once completed, would be transmitted to UNESCO, as assured by HMG of Nepal. The Observer informed the Committee that a technical co-operation request for the organization of an international technical meeting to discuss the proposed project for the conservation, restoration, and presentation of the Maya Devi Temple, would be submitted, following the request of the Bureau at its twenty-third session.

Archaeological Site of Chavin (Peru)
City of Cuzco (Peru)
Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Philippines)

The Observer of the Philippines assured the Committee that the long-term integrated development plan of the site, including a tourism development plan for the site, would be submitted in due course to UNESCO, preferably before 15 September 2000. To ensure that the authenticity and sustainable conservation of this fragile site is maintained, the Observer stated that his Government would avail of the generous offer of the Committee to provide technical expertise under the World Heritage Fund.

Auschwitz Concentration Camp (Poland)
The Sokkuram Grotto and Pulguksa Temple (Republic of Korea)
Alhambra, Generalife and Albaycin, Grenada (Spain)
Historic Areas of Istanbul (Turkey)

The Observer of Turkey thanked the Bureau for the sympathies expressed for the victims of the earthquake this year. The Observer stated that Istanbul is the only one among the nine World Heritage sites in Turkey located in the region impacted by the August 1999 earthquake. While the damage can only be measured over time, initial assessment has noted minor cracks in several historic monuments including the Hagia Sophia, and four museums. Severe cracks have, however, been noted in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, the conservation laboratory which is housed in an historic monument, in two historic library buildings, and in more than ten tombs as well as in the city walls (ramparts). The Committee was informed that the impact report of the second earthquake (in November 1999) on World Heritage sites had not been received by the Ministry of Culture of Turkey from its regional offices. The Observer said that a detailed report would be submitted to the Committee through the Secretariat as soon as it is completed.

With regard to the urban conservation plan of the historic peninsula of Istanbul, the Observer informed the Committee that the 1/5000 scale plan has just been completed and submitted to the Greater Istanbul Council and upon approval, will be transmitted to the Regional Conservation Council for clearance. As soon as this is officially approved, the 1/1000 scale plan will be prepared for the Fatih and Eminonu municipalities. In addition, the 1/500 scale detailed conservation plan for the Zeyrek district prepared by Istanbul Technical University, which was co-funded by the World Heritage Fund is about to be completed, and will be submitted to the Fatih Municipality for approval. The Observer thanked the UNESCO World Heritage Centre for having mobilized international support for the conservation of Istanbul’s urban heritage, and in this regard, expressed particular appreciation for the financial support extended by the European Commission and the Government of France.

The Observer concluded her intervention by saying that due to the need to finance earthquake rehabilitation activities, the budget of all government services had been severely cut, including that of the Ministry of Culture. While on-going joint conservation projects with the municipalities of Istanbul will be continued, no expansion in the area of work or additional activities will be possible for 2000.

The Delegate of Greece called upon the Committee to provide support to Turkey in the rehabilitation of the earthquake damage. In this regard, she recalled her statement at the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau, which pointed to the need to prioritize the object of international support in view of the vast conservation needs of the Istanbul World Heritage area. The Chairperson, in his personal capacity stated that this spirit of collaboration and solidarity expressed by Greece in favour of Turkey was a demonstration of the spirit of the World Heritage Convention.

X.47 The Delegate of the Republic of Korea and the Observer of Germany remarked that they would have appreciated it if the presentations of the state of conservation reports would have been accompanied by illustrations and/or plans. This would help the participants to better understand and form an opinion on the problems and characteristics of the property. The Chairperson suggested that the way in which the state of conservation reports are dealt with by the Committee could be looked at in the framework of the examination of the Strategic Task Force.

 

C.OTHER ISSUES

World Heritage and Mining

X.48 The Committee recalled that, based on discussions of specific cases at its twenty-second session, the former Chairperson, Professor Francioni, recommended the establishment of an informal contact group on mining and World Heritage sites during the annual sessions of the Committee and the Bureau.

X.49 The Committee noted that a dialogue with the mining industry had commenced and that the Centre, IUCN and ICOMOS had been invited by the International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME) to a working session on "Mining and Protected Areas and other Ecologically Sensitive Sites" on 20 October 1998 in London (UK).

X.50 The Committee was informed that the Bureau (July 1999) took note of the "WCPA Position Statement on Mining and Associated Activities in Relation to Protected Areas" (Information Document) and of further initiatives, including collaboration with UNEP’s Division of Technology, Industry and Economics and other units in UNESCO. The Chairperson, noting that the Bureau might wish to reflect on the relevance of WCPA’s Position Statement in the light of its deliberations on mining threats to specific sites, suggested that the WCPA Position Statement be submitted as a working document to the twenty-third session of the Committee. The document was presented as WHC-99/CONF.209/20.

X.51 IUCN reported to the Bureau that the statement had been prepared by the WCPA, one of the six commissions of IUCN with more than 1,400 members in 140 countries. The Position Statement on Mining was developed within the WCPA network. IUCN stated that mining is a key issue in many countries and this statement had been developed for the world’s protected areas in general, rather than for World Heritage sites specifically. However, the principles in the Position Statement may be applicable. The aims of the Statement are to: (a) provide a global framework to guide WCPA approaches; (b) provide a framework for countries to consider and adapt as needed in local circumstances; (c) establish a framework based on the IUCN protected area categories system which is focused on the objectives of protected area management. Finally, IUCN noted that mining is an issue at many World Heritage sites. IUCN is prepared to continue consultations on this issue, including with UNESCO and UNEP, as well as the mining industry and its International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME).

X.52 The Representative of ICOMOS commended WCPA for the Position Statement and fully supported it. He underlined that the exploitation of mineral resources and its impacts do not concern only natural sites, but also cultural landscapes and other cultural properties.

X.53 The Delegate of Canada supported the WCPA Position Statement and the ongoing work on protected areas and mining, and stated that there are specific concerns on mining in relation to World Heritage sites. He strongly supported a technical session, which should be carried out in collaboration with the mining industry.

X.54 The Observer of the United States of America wished to ensure that the status of the discussion paper provided by the WCPA as a working paper for the Committee meeting be clarified. The WCPA draft statement was the subject of a recent hearing before the United States Congress, because the impression had been conveyed that it would be proposed to the World Heritage Committee in Marrakesh, to adopt a policy that would ban mining outside World Heritage sites. Some of the confusion on this point occurred because Bureau document prepared for the July session suggested that the WCPA position statement on mining be recommended to the Committee for adoption. It is the understanding of the United States that this document was tabled for information purposes only. It is therefore noted for the record that this document is not recommended for adoption by the Committee. If the Committee chooses to authorize or participate in any follow-up discussions on the subject of mining and World Heritage, it is the position of the United States that these discussions must be fully transparent and open to stakeholders. It is noted, for example, that the International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME) was invited to comment on the WCPA policy, but the National Mining Association of the United States was not involved at all. The United States Observer further noted that mining policy is an internal matter for sovereign states and that the Committee is not dictating what domestic policies on this issue should be. Any results of follow-up discussions on mining policy will be strictly advisory to the States Parties.

X.55 To further clarify the discussion, she provided a text of the testimony presented at the hearing referenced above, given by the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks of the U.S. Department of the Interior, a former head of the U.S. Delegation to the World Heritage Committee. Her statement is provided in Annex IX.

X.56 In responding, IUCN reiterated to the Committee that the WCPA document is for information only, as it is clearly an internal document of IUCN. There is no intention to ban mining outside World Heritage sites, as has been suggested.

X.57 The Delegate of Australia stated his support for the IUCN work on protected areas and noted that collaboration with the mining industry exists, in particular in relation to the IUCN Protected Area Category VI. He informed the Committee that his Government would be pleased to share experiences on this issue.

X.58 The Observer of France commended the approach taken by the Secretariat and IUCN and underlined that there are threats to World Heritage sites. He suggested a code of conduct would be needed. This should also be taken into account in relation to marine sites and oil exploration, in particular in view of the expansion of economic activities.

X.59 The Delegate of Benin shared the view expressed by France and welcomed the debate, as in the past years this issue had been discussed in relation to specific World Heritage sites. He underlined that different regions should be involved in this debate. The Delegate of South Africa noted support for the Position Statement and commented that cultural sites be also taken into account.

X.60 The Director of the Centre and the Chairperson thanked the Committee for the rich debate. The Committee adopted the following decision:

"The Committee

(a) took note of the document in light of its deliberations on threats and potential threats from mining to specific World Heritage properties,

(b) recognized that there may possibly be additional issues and problems that are specific to the management of World Heritage sites facing ascertained and potential impacts from mining projects;

(c) requested the Centre to co-operate with interested UNESCO units, the advisory bodies, UN agencies (such as the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics in Paris), other concerned agencies and representatives from interested States Parties to the Convention and representatives of the mining industry, to organize a technical meeting to analyse case studies on World Heritage and mining during global events already planned for the year 2000 (e.g. the IUCN World Conservation Congress due to be held in Amman, Jordan, in October 2000), and develop recommendations for review and discussion by the twenty-fourth session of the Committee.

(d) asked the Chairperson to write a letter to the Director-General of IUCN concerning the organization of a technical session on World Heritage and Mining at the World Conservation Congress (Amman, Jordan, in October 2000)."

X.61 The Committee also took note of a debate on two other general issues, relevant to a number of World Heritage sites, discussed by the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau: Fire management/control, and invasive species. The Delegate of Thailand recalled that he had made a statement during the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau.

 

XI.ACTIVITIES CONCERNING WORLD HERITAGE DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND EDUCATION

XI.1 The Secretariat presented the activities detailed in Document WHC-99/CONF.209/15 on World Heritage Documentation, Information and Education Activities.

XI.2 The Director of the Centre introduced this item by recalling the new orientations of the Strategic Plan for Documentation, Information and Education approved by the Committee in 1998 at its twenty-second session. He further recalled the key strategic objectives set forth in the Strategic Plan. He stressed the need to strengthen the documentation function of the Centre, prepare new information materials with particular emphasis on state of conservation giving priority to sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. He further emphasized the importance of promoting awareness through education and media related activities.

XI.3 In an audio visual presentation, the Secretariat presented the five chapters of the proposed programme for 2000 to the Committee : I. Documentation, II. Information, III. Internet and WHIN, IV. Self-financing programme for partnerships with the media and publishers and V. Education.

XI.4 The Chairperson thanked the Secretariat for their clear presentation. The Delegate of Hungary expressed his strong support of the World Heritage Centre’s Documentation and Information Unit, recognizing the earnest dedication of this small team. He made reference to UNESCO’s Special Project for Young People’s Participation in World Heritage Preservation and Promotion and confirmed his country’s interest in this programme. In noting the success of the Centre’s Internet site, he expressed his view that there is a tremendous overlapping in the World Heritage Centre’s information activities. He called attention to the urgent need for a long-term information strategy aimed at consolidating activities under this Chapter with the activities foreseen under the Information Management System.

XI.5 The Committee adopted the programme and its budget without further discussion.

 

XII.EVALUATION OF INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE: EXAMINATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TWENTY-THIRD SESSION OF THE BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE CONCERNING PRIORITIZATION IN GRANTING INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

XII.1 The Chairperson introduced item 12 of the agenda concerning the evaluation of international assistance and gave the floor to the representative of the Central Evaluation Unit of UNESCO, who reported on the progress made in the evaluation process, and underlined the competence and independence of the consultants retained. He also insisted upon the training character of this evaluation exercise and the interest in retaining this as an organizational learning process. He finished by presenting a proposal to foresee a reserve of US$ 40,000 in the next budget to carry out impact studies in the field on a selected number of international assistance cases.

XII.2 During the debate, several delegates and members of the advisory bodies showed their interest in the on-going evaluation and referred to the management component of this exercise and expressed the wish that the impact studies would closely involve field specialists, certain of whom are members of the advisory bodies. ICCROM expressed its concern about the process and scope of the evaluation process. It stressed the difference between doing a study of "Efficiency and Management" which can easily be done by management consultants, and that of "Effectiveness Impact" which may best be done by professionals that are epxerts in the areas to be examined. It expressed its hope that the Centre will take this into account in follow-up phases of the evaluation.

XII.3 The following decision was adopted:

The Committee took note of the progress made in the evaluation of international assistance and recommended that, in the framework of the examination of the budget of the World Heritage Fund, a reserve of US$ 40,000 be foreseen for the impact studies. This amount is dependent upon the approval of the terms of reference by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session in June 2000.

XII.4 The Delegate of Thailand suggested that the work made by the External Auditor be taken into account and that duplication of work be avoided.

 

XIII.REVISION OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION

XIII.1 The Chairperson informed the Committee that the Working Document (WHC-99/CONF.209/17) concerning the proposed revisions to the Operational Guidelines included four sections :

1. Revision of Section I of the Operational Guidelines
2. Revision of Paragraph 65 of the Operational Guidelines
3. Revision of Paragraph 68 of the Operational Guidelines
4. Revision of Paragraphs 113-116 of the Operational Guidelines

A.REVISION OF SECTION I OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES

XIII.2 The Secretariat recalled that the Operational Guidelines have been revised many times over the last twenty years and are generally considered as requiring substantial editing and reorganization. In 1998 a Global Strategy meeting for cultural and natural heritage experts was held in Amsterdam in the Netherlands. The meeting discussed the application of the "test of authenticity" and the "conditions of integrity", the question of a unified set of criteria for cultural and natural heritage and the notion of "outstanding universal value". The report of the Amsterdam meeting was presented to the Committee at its twenty-second session in Kyoto, Japan.

XIII.3 The Secretariat recalled that the Amsterdam meeting made several recommendations including a proposal to develop a unified set of criteria to bring together the existing six cultural and four natural heritage criteria currently presented in Paragraphs 24 and 44 in the first section of the Operational Guidelines. The expert meeting concluded that a unified set of criteria would improve the logic of the Guidelines and emphasize and more clearly express the underlying principles of the Convention in relation to both cultural and natural, and mixed heritage, and cultural landscapes demonstrating outstanding interactions between people and the environment. The Amsterdam meeting also recommended that conditions of integrity be prepared for all ten criteria. For cultural properties this would include a test of authenticity.

XIII.4 The Secretariat informed the Committee that the Working Document concerning revisions to Section I of the Operational Guidelines examined by the twenty-third session of the Bureau in July, had been made available to the Committee as WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.12. The Secretariat recalled that the draft revisions had been prepared in full consultation with all three advisory bodies. The draft revisions, included a draft unified set of criteria with minimal change to the actual text of the criteria as a way of improving the presentation and clarity of Section I of the Guidelines and to better reflect what has been described as the nature/culture continuum expressed at many World Heritage properties around the world.

XIII.5 The Secretariat recalled that at its twenty-third session, the Bureau welcomed the generous invitation by the Observer of the United Kingdom to host an international expert meeting on the Operational Guidelines. The meeting will take place in Canterbury in the United Kingdom from 10-14 April 2000.

XIII.6 The Representative of ICOMOS noted the considerable importance of the discussions on the proposed unified set of criteria and on interpretations of the "test of authenticity". He noted that the meeting to be held in Zimbabwe in May 2000 would examine the application of the "test of authenticity" and "conditions of integrity" for Africa. He informed the Committee that the ICOMOS General Assembly held in Mexico in October 1999 had approved the Nara Document on Authenticity and that it therefore became part of the corpus of reference texts of ICOMOS. He emphasized the importance of the Nara Document in recognising, in differing regional contexts, the diversity of cultural heritage and human development. He referred to the constructive discussions that are linking culture and nature, and that had recognised cultural landscapes. Finally, he highlighted the need to recognise authenticity in the context of heritage of spiritual value.

XIII.7 The Observer of the United Kingdom informed the Committee of the aims, objectives and expected outcomes of the Expert Meeting on the Operational Guidelines to be held in Canterbury in 2000. He noted that representatives, including States Parties and site managers, from all regions would be invited. He indicated that the meeting would not re-write the Operational Guidelines but instead work on proposals to reorganise them to ensure a more user-friendly version. He thanked the Committee for having provided funds, additional to those contributed by the United Kingdom, for the meeting.

XIII.8 The Representative of ICCROM provided complementary comments to those of ICOMOS. He informed the Committee that ICCROM and ICOMOS had prepared a joint paper on the subject that they would provide to the Secretariat. He commented that it was important that a unified set of criteria did not blur the distinction between integrity and authenticity.

XIII.9 In recalling the resolution of the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties, the Observer of France commented that a unified set of criteria could contribute to ensuring a more representative World Heritage List. He expressed his concern that the Committee continued to delay the unification of the criteria and called for immediate action in this respect.

XIII.10 IUCN expressed their strong agreement with the Delegate of France stating that it was time for action by bringing the natural and cultural criteria into a continuum of criteria for World Heritage. IUCN stated that they had consulted widely within its constituency and that there is consistent support for the change to the criteria and that a decision is keenly awaited. IUCN urged that the Canterbury meeting be encouraged to work towards a draft which accommodates the integration of the criteria and endeavour to include both the conditions of integrity and the test of authenticity. The Observer of France underlined the confusion that the draft decision II.3 might encourage. With such a procedure, the Committee would confer a ‘decisional’ character to the evaluations of the advisory bodies that only the Bureau session in June disposes. The Delegate of Morocco noted that the revision of the Operational Guidelines is not in itself negative. What is of concern is more the rhythm of the revisions. He added that it would be advantageous to have a revised text that could be valid for the next twenty years. The importance of a concertation between the different working groups created by the Committee was emphasized.

XIII.11 The Delegate of Zimbabwe referred to the Amsterdam meeting as a milestone and expressed his agreement with the statements made by France and IUCN saying that it was time to act on the proposal to unifiy the criteria.

XIII.12 The Committee decided to refer the subject of a unified set of criteria to the Expert Meeting to be held in Canterbury, United Kingdom for review.

B.REVISION TO PARAGRAPH 65 OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES

XIII.13 The Committee considered the revision to paragraph 65 of the Operational Guidelines as recommended by the Bureau at its twenty-third session. The Committee recalled that discussions took place at the twenty-second session of the Committee and the twenty-third session of the Bureau on the proposal made by the Delegate of Italy, and that a working group chaired by Professor Francionni had reviewed the implications of paragraph 65 during the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Bureau, and indicated that the evaluations of nominations, prepared by the advisory bodies, be transmitted to the States Parties concerned at the same time as they are transmitted to the members of the Committee.

XIII.14 The Observer of France stated that the proposed revision might seem to add transparency but as a matter of fact it would give the advisory bodies a role of a decision-maker which does not belong to them but to the World Heritage Bureau and Committee. He noted, as did many delegates, and also the advisory bodies, that the revision could create confusion about the nomination and evaluation procedures. It was also observed that the Operational Guidelines had been revised frequently over the past years and that it would be advisable that this revision be considered in the context of the overall revision of the Operational Guidelines. Two delegates reminded the Committee that the intention of the proposed revision was to enhance equity between the Committee members and those States Parties who are not members of the World Heritage Committee.

XIII.15 The Committee decided to defer the examination of the proposed revision. It requested that this matter be considered in the framework of the meeting on the Operational Guidelines that will take place in the United Kingdom in April 2000.

C.REVISION TO PARAGRAPH 68 OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES

XIII.16 The Committee recalled that the Bureau at its twenty-third session considered a proposal made by the Delegate of Australia that reactive state of conservation reports also be transmitted to the States Parties concerned prior to the Bureau and Committee sessions. The Bureau had subsequently transmitted to the Committee a proposed revision to paragraph 68 of the Operational Guidelines.

XIII.17 The Committee decided to defer the examination of the proposed revision. It requested that this matter be considered in the framework of the meeting on the Operational Guidelines that will take place in the United Kingdom in April 2000.

D.REVISION TO PARAGRAPHS 113-116 OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES

XIII.18 The Bureau at its twenty-third session had requested the Secretariat to propose specific revisions to paragraphs 113-116 related to priorities in providing International Assistance to States Parties. The Secretariat, however, proposed to the Committee that these revisions be prepared on the basis of the outcome of the evaluation of International Assistance that was currently being undertaken.

XIII.19 The Delegate of Belgium stated that a revision was necessary, as the present Guidelines do not exactly reflect the priorities set out in the resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties. The Observer of Japan made reference to the statement of the former Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee at the twelfth General Assembly that, in the absence of clear guidelines, he had to evaluate requests for international assistance on the basis of first come, first served. Instead, the international assistance should have a linkage with the Global Strategy and thus priority should be given to least developed countries as well as low income countries and especially those that are under-represented on the World Heritage List. In supporting the Observer of Japan, the Delegate of Benin recalled that the Bureau at its twenty-third session had encountered the situation whereby there were insufficient funds for international assistance requests and therefore precise priorities should be defined and adhered to when examining these requests. The Committee expressed its gratitude that the Government of Japan had made a voluntary contribution of US$ 300,000 in order to respond in a timely fashion to requests for preparatory assistance that were fully justified and responded to the objectives of the Global Strategy.

XIII.20 The Committee decided to refer this matter to the Strategic Task Force chaired by Canada for further consideration. It requested that this be done on the basis of the concerns expressed during the discussions by the Bureau at its twenty-third session, the deliberations at the twenty-third session of the Committee, the outcomes of the evaluation of International Assistance and in line with the resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties.

 

XIV.EXAMINATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND AND APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET FOR 2000 AND PRESENTATION OF A PROVISIONAL BUDGET FOR 2001

XIV.1 The Chairperson presented the following documents concerning the agenda item 14 :

• WHC-99/CONF.209/18, which presents the World Heritage Fund, the income and forecasts, the work plan and the proposed budget. This document also presents the justification of the annual requirements of the advisory bodies as well as the accounts of the World Heritage Fund as at 31 December 1998, the detailed financial statement as at 31 December 1998 and the accounts and income of the World Heritage Fund as at 30 September 1999.
• WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.18, which presents the activity reports of ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM undertaken since the twenty-second session of the World Heritage Committee.

The Chairperson then reminded the Committee of the decisions that should be taken during this session :

• Firstly, to take note of the approved accounts of the World Heritage Fund as at 31 December 1998 and of provisional accounts for 1999 as at 31 October 1999.
• Adopt the budgetary ceiling for 2000, allocate budgetary amounts to the different chapters in accordance with the approved ceiling and the decisions of the Committee during its discussions on other items of the agenda,
• Examine and approve the provisional budget for 2001,
• Finally, decide upon the situation of the World Heritage Fund and compulsory and voluntary contributions, notably the minimum ceiling and the implementation of resources to improve the availability of financial resources for inscribed sites, and to formalise co-operation with international and regional finance development institutions.

XIV.2 The Deputy Director of the  Centre then presented in the following order :

• The available resources for the implementation of the  Convention (States Parties’ contributions, Regular Programme Budget, extrabudgetary funds, staff costs of the World Heritage Centre), as well as the state of approved accounts of the World Heritage Fund as of 31 October 1999,
• The situation of the World Heritage Centre as at 31 October 1999,
• The budget proposal for 2000 and provisional budget for 2001.

XIV.3 After several questions concerning the Reserve Fund and its provision, the total budget for the World Heritage Fund including funds allocated to promotional activities was approved. This amounted to five million one hundred and fifty six thousand United States dollars (US$ 5,156,000). The provisional budget for the year 2001 was fixed at four million eight hundred and sixty-three thousand United States dollars (US$ 4,863,000 ). The approved Emergency Reserve Fund for 2000 is six hundred thousand United States dollars
(US$ 600,000).

XIV.4 The resource situation of the World Heritage Centre was also discussed by the Committee.

As at 31 October 1999, the number of established posts at the Centre was twenty-two, of which eleven are professional posts. Three associate expert posts at the Centre financed by Austria, Germany and Japan. Another associate expert post (Italy) joined the Centre on 8 November 1999.

Income other than the World Heritage Fund available to the World Heritage Centre for 2000 can be estimated as follows :

• US$ 2,463,300 from the Regular Programme of UNESCO of which US$ 1, 928, 850 for staff costs,
• US$ 3,847,350 extrabudgetary funds from Finland, France, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the United Nations Foundation, as well as other States Parties and finance and development institutions.

The Committee accepted that these funds could be utilised by the Centre in accordance with the objectives specified by the donors until such time as simplified procedures for the approval of these funds be established by the Committee.

XIV.5 The Committee noted that, in spite of a substantial increase in the annual budget of the Fund, the average available amount per site has not varied since 1989 and is approximately US$ 5,000. This clearly demonstrates the lack of resources available from the World Heritage Fund in the face of increasing needs. Following the proposal made by the Secretariat, the Committee requested the Centre to prepare a proposal for the formalisation of co-operation with international funding institutes for development to be studied by the Task Force chaired by Canada before its submission to the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau.

XIV.6 An in-depth discussion on the different components of the budget followed this presentation. The Committee’s attention particularly drawn to the amounts proposed for 2000 as follows :

• the development of a Management Information System (US$ 125,000 from Chapter I),
• Coordination with other Conventions and Programmes (US$ 45,000 under Chapter I),
• The amounts proposed for the Advisory Bodies under Chapter II (US$ 435,000 for ICOMOS, $US 325,000 for IUCN) and in Chapter III for ICCROM ($US 127,325),
• Support to the Arab States for the submission of periodic reports in 2000 ($US 140,000) under Chapter IV.

XIV.7 Many delegates intervened to propose that the advisory bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM) be given the amounts that they had asked and that the budgets reserved for them should not be cut any more. The delegates recalled the considerable increase of nominations during the last years and noted that as the advisory bodies were asked to render more services, they should be paid for that too. The Delegate of Canada wished to recall that this integral approval of the budgets submitted by ICOMOS and IUCN should be considered as an exception to the rule. Furthermore, the Delegate requested that in the future the advisory bodies present their annual budgets and plans according to an agreed upon format.

XIV.8 There was a long discussion about the amount needed for development of an Information Management System. Some delegates noted that the proposed sum of US$ 125,000 was not justified. Other delegates and the Observer of the United States of America recalled the specific recommendation made by the External Auditor on the urgent need to improve the Information Management System and supported the proposal of the Secretariat.

XIV.9 The Delegate of Canada expressed her frustration about the way the budget was currently being discussed and approved. The Delegate proposed that a financial sub-committee be created. This body could have a proper and detailed discussion on the different aspects of the budget, including the budget proposal made by the advisory bodies. Many delegates expressed the same concern and supported the idea of creating a financial sub-committee. The Task Force, chaired by Canada, was asked to reflect on this issue.

XIV.10 The Delegate of Hungary proposed that a separate budget line be created for the Eastern and Central European countries as well as for the countries of Central Asia. This would be in line with UNESCO practice where these countries are addressed as a separate electoral group II. The Delegate of Hungary felt obliged to speak on behalf of these forty-eight countries of which twenty-six fulfil the criteria of least developed countries and are facing serious economical problems. He stated that less financial support should be given to wealthy western European and North American countries, in favour of other regional groups.

XIV.11 The Delegation of the Republic of Korea expressed his concern about the insufficient attention paid to the needs of Asian countries that represent roughly two-thirds of the world population and are under-represented on the World Heritage List. He proposed that these countries be given sufficient financial support under the budget Chapter IV.

XIV.12 The discussions and responses to questions raised by Committee members and observers led to the following decisions of the Committee for the Chapters and components of the budget herebelow :

Chapter I – Implementation of the Convention

• The continuation of the evaluation of International Assistance for an amount of US$ 40,000 of which the use is submitted to the decision of the next Bureau based on the proposal for approval of an impact study to be presented by the Secretariat.
• An amount of US$ 114,000 was approved for the development of a Management Information System instead of the initial US$ 125,000, the remaining amount be covered by the Regular Budget of the Centre. It was agreed that the proposals should be subject to independent evaluation and the Observer of the United Kingdom offered the services of English Heritage for this purpose.
• The amount proposed for coordination with other Conventions and Programmes was reduced to US$ 25,000.

The amount approved for Chapter I amounts to US$ 264,000.

Chapter II – Establishment of the World Heritage List

• A special line is created under the Global Strategy for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe with an allocation of US$ 20,000.
• The sum  allocated to ICOMOS for thematic studies amounts to US$ 40,000.
• The budgets of the advisory bodies (ICOMOS and IUCN) are approved as submitted (US$ 495,000 for ICOMOS and US$ 355,000 for IUCN).
• The budget line « other institutions and individuals » was reduced to US$ 20,000.

The sum approved for Chapter II amounts to US$ 1,148,000.

Chapter III – Technical Implementation of the Convention

In the discussion of this Chapter, the Director-General of ICCROM made reference to the proposal for a global training strategy (WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.22 – Progress Report on the Development of a Global Training Strategy for Cultural Heritage in the Framework of the World Heritage Convention). He regretted that given time constraints ICCROM was unable to present the report to the Committee. He then presented the details of his proposed plan of co-operation for 2000. In doing so, the Director-General explained that he was not seeking the financial support for the functioning of ICCROM but rather to cover support costs in the form of external consultants.

• The amount foreseen for ICCROM for training was adjusted in accordance with the decisions of the Committee and amounts to US$ 192,635 including ICCROM management costs and coordination operations for World Heritage as requested by ICCROM. In this respect, the Director of the World Heritage Centre recalled that ICCRO‎M was an intergovernmental organisation receiving contributions from its Member States and that consequently ICCROM should easily be able to cover its management costs within the framework of its budget for co-operation with the Centre.
• The amount foreseen for on-site promotional activities was reduced by US$ 20,000 in favour of the budgetary line for the development of an Information Mangement System (Chapter I).

The other budgetary lines were approved.
The sum approved for Chapter III amounts to US$ 2,630,000.

Chapter IV – Reactive Monitoring and Submission of Periodic Reports

For reactive monitoring, it was decided to add a special budgetary line for state of conservation monitoring activities for Kakadu National Park (Australia) by ICSU for an amount of US$ 61,000. The Delegate of Australia noted that this allocation flowed from the decision of the recent extraordinary session of the Committee and that the State Party was concerned at delays in carrying out this work.

The distribution of allocated funds for support to States Parties for the submission of periodic reports was discussed at length and revised as shown in the budget table.

The sum approved under Chapter IV amounts US$ 622,000.

Chapter V – Documentation, Information and Education

The amount for this Chapter was approved without any modifications.

The following table provides details of the approved budget by Chapter and component.

 

Approved budget for 2000 and provisional budget for 2001

Chapters and components	Approved budget 1999	Approved Budget 2000	Provisional Budget 2001
Chapter I – Implementation of the Convention
Participation at statutory meetings	70 000	60 000	70 000
Extraordinary session of the WHC	30 000
Working group for WH strategic planning	0	10 000	10 000
Working group on revision of Operational Guidelines	0	15 000	0
Financial, Management Reviews and Consultative Group	0	0	0
Development of an Information Management System	60 000	114 000	100 000
Cartography (NB : financed by EXB)	0	0	0
Evaluation of International Assistance	40 000	40 000	0
Coordination with other Conventions and Programmes etc…	25 000	25 000	45 000
Sub-total Chapter I	225 000	264 000	225 000
Chapter II – Establishment of the World Heritage List
Global Strategy	213 000	278 000	250 000
Africa	11 000	40 000
Arab States	38 000	8 000
Asia, including Central Asia*	21 000	50 000
Pacific	30 000	50 000
Europe & North America	30 000	10 000
Eastern and Central Europe	n.a.	20 000
Latin America and the Caribbean	45 000	45 000
Thematic studies:
ICOMOS	23 000	40 000
IUCN	15 000	15 000
Advisory services:
ICOMOS	407 000	495 000	420 000
IUCN	325 000	355 000	300 000
Others	30 000	20 000	35 000
Sub-total Advisory Services :	762 000	870 000	755 000
Sub-total Chapter II	975 000	1 148 000	1 005 000
Chapter III – Technical Implementation of the Convention
Preparatory Assistance	300 000	325 000	350 000
Technical Co-operation Including IUCN/WHC Africa 2002 Nature	1 245 000	1 245 000 60 000	1 250 000
Training	981 000	980 000	985 000
Including ICCROM	241 000	192 635
Including IUCN	30 000	30 000
Including training activities for the preparation of monitoring reports	50 000
Africa 2009		80 000
Support to on-site promotional activities	100 000	80 000	100 000
Sub-total Chapter III	2 626 000	2 630 000	2 685 000
Chapter IV – Monitoring the state of conservation of sites
Reactive Monitoring	195 000	262 500	200 000
Including ICOMOS	60 000	60 000
Including IUCN	45 000	56 500
Including ICSU (monitoring of Kakadu National Park)		61 000
Support to States Parties for the submission of Periodic Reports:
Methodology development	15 000	22 500	20 000
Support to States Parties of a Region selected by the Committee (Article 29)
Technical Coordination for Submission	0	35 000	35 000
Africa	60 000	77 000	130 000
Arab States	45 000	100 000	40 000
Asia and Pacific	60 000	55 000	90 000
Europe and North America	10 000	15 000	20 000
Eastern and Central Europe	30 000	20 000	20 000
Latin America and the Caribbean	50 000	35 000	40 000
Sub-total support for periodic reporting	255 000	337 000	375 000
Sub-total Chapter IV	465 000	622 000	595 000
Chapter V – Documentation, Information and Education
Documentation	35 000	38 000	40 000
Information material	155 000	140 000	150 000
Production and distribution of an explanatory note on the Implementation of Article 29 of the Convention	20 000	0	0
Internet and WHIN	75 000	70 000	75 000
Media and Publishers	10 000	8 000	8 000
Education	90 000	80 000	80 000
Sub-total Chapter V	385 000	336 000	353 000
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET OF WHF	4 676 000	5 000 000	4 863 000
Emergency Reserve Fund	600 000	600 000	600 000
Promotional Activities and services for these activities	150 000	156 000	150 000
GRAND TOTAL	5 426 000	5 756 000	5 613 000

 

XV.REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

XV.1 The Bureau met during the twenty-third session of the Committee after the budget for Technical Assistance of year 2000 under Chapter III was approved, to take decisions or recommend decisions to the Committee concerning international assistance requests.

XV.2 The attention of the Committee and Bureau was drawn to the documents WHC-99/CONF.209/6, WHC-99/CONF.209/19 and WHC-99/CONF.209/INF.10 concerning International Assistance Requests. The Secretariat pointed out the difficulties it faced in preparing the working document, due to the ever increasing number of international assistance requests submitted, in particular those received after the prescribed deadline of 1 September 1999 indicated in paragraph 112 of the Operational Guidelines. The Secretariat had counted a total of 55 international assistance requests which were considered by the World Heritage Centre Regional Desks to have sufficient information for examination and decision by the Committee, Bureau or Chairperson, including one submitted on 2 December 1999. However, the Secretariat stated that there were numerous other requests which are pending due to insufficient information or on-going consultation with the concerned States Parties.

XV.3 The Secretariat and the advisory bodies underscored the very difficult task of processing and evaluating requests for presentation to the Committee and Bureau, when requests were prepared and submitted at the very last minute. ICCROM, drawing the attention of the Committee to the fact that no training requests transmitted to ICCROM for evaluation had been received before the prescribed deadline, underlined the importance of adequate evaluation for ensuring a wide sharing of benefits. The Delegate of Belgium, appreciating the increasing workload and time constraints faced by the Committee, Advisory Bodies and the World Heritage Centre, stressed the importance of having sufficient time to the study the detailed working documents. In order to allow sufficient time for the Secretariat, Advisory Bodies, and Committee to adequately examine individual requests, and in view of the limited funds available under the World Heritage Fund technical assistance budget, the Committee adopted the following:

"The Committee urged States Parties to respect the deadline for submission of international assistance requests, as indicated in paragraph 112 of the Operational Guidelines, to ensure that the Secretariat, Advisory Bodies, and Committee have adequate time to evaluate and examine requests. Taking note of the growing number of international requests submitted by States Parties and the increasing amounts being requested, the Committee encouraged States Parties, to the extent possible, to plan activities well in advance and in close co-operation with the Advisory Bodies and the Secretariat, in order to plan projects which have a "catalytic effect" and are likely to generate contributions from other sources than the World Heritage Fund, per paragraph 113 of the Operational Guidelines."

XV.4 The Secretariat recalled the Committee’s past decisions concerning the allocation of international assistance between cultural and natural heritage. Upon examination of 55 requests, the Bureau approved 20 requests for a total amount of US$ 582,700, the Committee approved 15 requests for a total amount of US$ 744,348, and the Committee took note of 18 requests to be approved by the Chairperson for a total amount of US$ 298,229, and two requests to be approved by the Director of the World Heritage Centre for a total amount of US$ 10,000.

1.International Assistance for Natural Heritage

Twelve requests for international assistance for natural heritage were presented in Document WHC-99/CONF.209/19. The Committee noted that the following three requests for a total amount of US$ 60,000 had been submitted for examination and approval by the Chairperson for Natural Heritage.

1.AFRICA(c).II GABON Training assistance
Workshop on implementation of the World Heritage Convention, preparation of Tentative List & Nomination of natural properties
US$ 20,000 requested US$ 20,000 recommended for approval

1.ASIA(d).II REGIONAL (NEPAL) Training assistance
Support for natural World Heritage site managers from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka participants at South Asian Forum on Protected Area Management
US$ 20,000 requested US$ 20,000 recommended for approval

1.LATIN(c).III COSTA RICA Training assistance
CATIE training course for Latin American Protected Area managers
US$ 20,000 requested US$ 20,000 recommended for approval

The Committee took note that the following eight requests for international assistance for natural heritage had been approved by the Bureau for a total of US$ 265,700.

1.AFRICA(a).I KENYA Preparatory assistance
Preparation of nomination for «Great Rift Valley Lakes System» incorporating Lake Nakuru and the Naivasha National Park and Lake Bogoria National Reserve
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Committee noted that the amount approved is conditional to the State Party providing a detailed explanation on the potential cultural heritage values of the area being considered for nomination, to be reviewed by ICOMOS.

1.AFRICA(b).I NIGER Emergency assistance
Emergency rehabilitation plan for Air & Tenere Natural Reserves
US$ 75,000 requested US$ 75,000 approved

The Bureau approved the amount of US$ 75,000 requesting the World Heritage Centre to explore obtaining cost savings in the purchase and delivery of the four-wheel drive vehicle. The Bureau invited the State Party to include information on the progress made in implementing all projects financed by the World Heritage Fund in the report on the state of conservation on this site included in the List of World Heritage in Danger to be submitted to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee in 2000 (Chapter X, paragraph 10).

1.AFRICA(c).I TANZANIA Training assistance
Three fellowships for African specialists in protected area / wildlife management for the academic year 2000-2001
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Observer of Germany noted that assistance from the World Heritage Fund should not be continuous over a period of decades or a long period of time, but should ideally be utilized in a catalytic manner, as "seed money". He suggested that the Committee may wish to request the State Party to submit an evaluation of the activity which had continued over many years with the assistance of the World Heritage Fund, and moreover to urge the State Party to seek financial support from other sources than the World Heritage Fund. The Delegate of Zimbabwe underlined that this activity benefited the African region as a whole and not only to the State Party of Tanzania. The Bureau approved US$ 30,000, requesting the World Heritage Centre to report to its twenty-fourth extraordinary session, any cost savings and other benefits accrued through the implementation of this fellowship project through the UNESCO Fellowship Unit.

1.AFRICA(d).I. TANZANIA Technical Co-operation
Workshop for strengthening research and monitoring capacity for natural world heritage sites in Tanzania
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau recommended that the State Party closely involve its GEF focal points in the planning and organization of the workshop and to ensure that the proposal developed as an outcome of the workshop meet GEF financing criteria.

1.ARAB(a).I MOROCCO Preparatory assistance
Nomination of Atlas Mountain Nature Reserve
US$ 15,000 requested US$ 15,000 approved

This request for US$ 15,000, normally eligible for approval by the Chairperson, was approved by the Bureau in accordance with paragraph 110(a) of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

1.ASIA(d).I JAPAN Technical Co-operation
Support to 7 participants from China (1), Indonesia (2), India (1), Nepal (1) and Vietnam (1) to attend the Kagoshima International Conference on World Natural Heritage, Kagoshima and Yakushima Island World Heritage site, 18-22 May 2000
US$ 25,700 requested US$ 25,700 approved

1.LATIN(c)I. BRAZIL Training assistance
Implementation of the World Heritage Convention in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau authorized the Chairperson to approve the release of funds subject to the receipt of the revised proposal incorporating all comments and suggestions made by IUCN

1.LATIN(c)II. VENEZUELA Training assistance
Workshop for stakeholders concerned with the conservation of Canaima National Park
US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau authorized the Chairperson to approve the release of funds subject to the receipt of the revised proposal incorporating all comments and suggestions made by IUCN.

The Committee examined and approved the following request for international assistance for natural heritage for a total of US$ 50,000, which had been recommended by the Bureau:

1.AFRICA(d).II. COTE D’IVOIRE Technical Co-operation
Strengthening protection of Comoe National Park
US$ 59,500 requested US$ 50,000 approved

The Committee approved a sum of US$ 50,000 of the US$ 59,500 requested by the State Party and requested the World Heritage Centre and the State Party to co-operate to achieve cost-savings in the budget lines concerned with the purchase of vehicles and computers and printers. The Committee invited the State Party to provide a detailed progress report on the implementation of the project to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee in 2000.

XV.5 The Chairperson expressed some reservations towards approving large amounts of international assistance conditional to the concerned States Parties submitting revised budgets and workplans, to be approved by him later. The Delegate of Australia stated that it was reasonable that requests be approved by the Chairperson once full information is received from States Parties. IUCN informed the Bureau and Committee that for some cases, inquiries and clarifications requested by IUCN were the cause for delay. However, IUCN further stated that for the natural heritage requests examined by the Committee and Bureau as presented in WHC-99/CONF.209/19, it was confident that the requests were reasonable requests, although finetuning may be necessary for some.

XV.6 The requests for international assistance for natural heritage approved by the Committee and Bureau are listed below according to region and type of assistance. (amounts in US dollars).

 

	Allocation for natural heritage for 2000	Africa	Arab States	Asia & Pacific	Latin America & Caribbean
(a) Preparatory assistance	N/A	30,000	15,000
(b) Emergency assistance	N/A	75,000
(c) Training assistance	At least 490,000	30,000			30,000 30,000
(d) Technical Co-operation	At least 415,000	30,000 50,000		25,700
Subtotal		215,000	15,000	25,700	60,000

 

2. International Assistance for Mixed Heritage

Three requests for international assistance for mixed heritage were presented in Document WHC-99/CONF.209/19. The Committee noted that the following two requests for a total amount of US$ 34,500 had been submitted for examination and approval by the Chairperson for mixed heritage:

2.ARAB(a).I EGYPT Preparatory assistance
Nomination of St. Catherine Area and South Sinai, as mixed (natural and cultural landscape) site
US$ 19,500 requested US$ 19,500 recommended for approval

The Committee took note that the State Party was to be invited to withdraw its 1999 nomination of St. Catherine and to re-submit a nomination of St. Catherine and south Sinai as a mixed property before 1 July 2000 for examination by the Bureau and Committee in 2001. The Observer from Germany noted that in order to mitigate threats caused by development pressure, an impact analysis was desirable and that ways and means to mitigate threats should be examined for the long-term conservation of this important site.

2.LATIN(a).I GUATEMALA Preparatory assistance
Elaboration of Tentative List for cultural & natural heritage
US$ 15,000 requested US$ 15,000 recommended for approval

The Committee took note that the Bureau had approved the following request for international assistance for mixed heritage for a total of US$ 30,000.

2.PACIFIC(a).I PAPUA NEW GUINEA Preparatory assistance
Preparation of the Bobongara nomination
US$ 31,123 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 subject to the State Party paying its dues to the World Heritage Fund in 1998 and 1999. The Bureau requested the State Party to give consideration for preparing the nomination of Bobongara as a mixed site or as a cultural site, taking into consideration the comments from the Advisory Bodies. The Bureau welcomed the request submitted by the State Party, which would enhance the implementation of the Global Strategy. The Delegate of Zimbabwe, noting that many States Parties who were in arrears were also States Parties in need of international assistance, recalled the discussion during the 12^th General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention whereby developed States Parties were called upon to assist Least Developed Countries and Low-Income Countries in paying arrears. The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that his Government would try to support Papua New Guinea in paying its dues (US$ 488) to the World Heritage Fund.

The request for international assistance for mixed heritage approved by the Bureau is listed below according to region and type of assistance (amount in US dollars).

	Allocation for mixed heritage for 2000	Asia & Pacific
(a) Preparatory assistance	N/A	30,000
Subtotal		30,000

 

3.International Assistance for Cultural Heritage

38 requests for international assistance for cultural heritage were presented in Document WHC-99/CONF.209/19, and two additional requests were submitted to the Bureau for examination and approval.

The Committee noted that the following thirteen requests for a total amount of US$ 203,729 had been submitted for examination and approval by the Chairperson for cultural heritage:

3.AFRICA(a).I BOTSWANA Preparatory assistance
Tsolido nomination preparation
US$ 19,094 requested US$ 19,094 recommended for approval

3.AFRICA(a).IV KENYA Preparatory assistance
Preparation of the Lamu nomination dossier
US$ 15,924 requested US$ 15,924 recommended for approval

3.AFRICA(a).VI TOGO Preparatory assistance
Tentative List
US$ 18,085 requested US$ 18,085 recommended for approval

3.AFRICA(d).II TANZANIA Technical Co-operation
Radio calls & solar panels for the Ruins of Kilwa and Songo Mnara, the Ngorongoro Conservation Area
US$ 19,426 requested approval recommended after further clarification is received

3.ASIA(a).I CHINA Preparatory assistance
Expert Meeting & preparation of group nomination of ancient canal towns of Jiangnan, China
US$ 20,000 requested US$ 20,000 recommended for approval

3.ASIA(a).III INDIA Preparatory assistance
Nomination of Padmanabhapuram Palace, Tamil Nadu
US$ 15,000 requested US$ 16,362 recommended for approval

3.ASIA(c).III NEPAL & NORWAY Training assistance
Tourism training workshop in Kathmandu Valley
US$ 17,000 requested US$ 17,000 recommended for approval

3.ASIA(d).I PAKISTAN Technical Co-operation
Research & documentation for enhancement of Master Plan of Shalamar Gardens
US$ 10,000 requested US$ 10,000 recommended for approval

3.ASIA.(e).I REPUBLIC of KOREA Promotional assistance
Publication of World Heritage Fortress Cities seminar background documentation
US$ 10,000 requested US$ 10,000 recommended for approval

3.LATIN(b).I GUATEMALA Emergency assistance
Rehabilitation of Quirigua
US$ 32,248 requested US$ 27,248 recommended for approval

3.LATIN(b).II GUATEMALA Emergency assistance
Clean up and preventive measures for Antigua Guatemala
US$ 20,216 requested US$ 20,216 recommended for approval

3.LATIN(c).I BRAZIL Training assistance
Evaluation of CECRE regional training programme
US$ 14,800 requested US$ 14,800 recommended for approval

3.LATIN(c).II DOMINICA Training assistance
Preparation of training course on cultural heritage
US$ 15,000 requested US$ 15,000 recommended for approval

The Committee took note that the Bureau had approved the following 11 requests for international assistance for cultural heritage for a total of US$ 287,000.

3.AFRICA(a).II GAMBIA Preparatory assistance
Follow-up actions to ICOMOS recommendations for James Island & Albreda Juffure Santo Domingo Historic Zone
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 for this activity, which is in line with the implementation of the Global Strategy and aims at the preparation of a nomination file in accordance with ICOMOS recommendations, subject to the State Party paying its dues to the World Heritage Fund.

3.AFRICA(a).III GUINEA Preparatory assistance
Establishment of a Tentative List of cultural and natural heritage sites
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 for this activity, subject to the State Party paying its dues to the World Heritage Fund.

3.AFRICA(a).V TANZANIA Preparatory assistance
Preservation of Kondoa Irangi Rock Art Paintings
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 7,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 7,000 to finance a mission by an international expert to address the issues raised by ICCROM (see WHC-99/CONF.209/19) and for the organization of an initial national seminar to identify stakeholders, create a task force, and to prepare project work plans.

3.AFRICA(d).I GHANA Technical Co-operation
Enhanced management for Forts & Castles of Ghana
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 subject to the State Party paying its dues to the World Heritage Fund, requesting the World Heritage Centre to clarify the issues raised by ICCROM before drawing up a contract for ensuring successful implementation of the project.

3.ASIA(a).II DPR of KOREA Preparatory assistance
Finalization of Tentative List & Koguryo tomb nomination preparation
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000, requesting the State Party, World Heritage Centre, and the Advisory Bodies to closely co-operate in formulating the Tentative List and nomination dossier of the Koguryo Tombs, in organizing the study tour of the national experts.

3.ASIA(c).I CHINA Training assistance
Training course on using GIS for the preservation and management of Historic and Cultural sites in China
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 subject to further clarification from the Chinese authorities on the points raised by ICCROM. The Bureau recommended that consideration be given to providing an opportunity to include regional participants to expand the benefits beyond those gained by the Chinese professionals. The Bureau finally requested the World Heritage Centre to closely monitor the implementation of this activity, in consultation with the Chinese authorities and ICCROM.

3.ASIA(c).IV REP KOREA Training assistance
International Fortress Cities management seminar
US$ 25,000 requested US$ 20,000 approved

The Bureau approved US$ 20,000 as a contribution for the organization of the International Fortress Cities management seminar and to facilitate the participation of experts from developing States Parties, taking into due consideration the comments of ICCROM.

3.ASIA(c).V REGIONAL (Philippines & Indonesia) Training assistance
Request to supplement the South East Asian Global Strategy Meeting
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Bureau recalled that US$ 5,000 had been approved under the Global Strategy budget for organizing the South East Asian Global Strategy Meeting to identify and discuss themes such as archaeological sites in the region and cultural landscapes maintained by minorities inhabiting the highlands of mainland South East Asia and the forests and coastal enclaves of insular South East Asia (reference WHC-99/CONF.209/8). The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 under training assistance to seek the balance required for the year 2000 for organizing this Global Strategy meeting in Toraja, Indonesia.

3.EUROPE(d).II LATVIA Technical Co-operation
Regional Seminar on authenticity & reconstruction work
US$ 25,000 requested US$ 25,000 approved

The Bureau noted that the request was endorsed by Lithuania, and other Eastern and Central European States Parties.

3.EUROPE(d).III LATVIA Technical Co-operation
Restoration of Reutern House interior, Old Riga
US$ 25,000 requested US$ 25,000 approved

3.LATIN(d).II CUBA Technical Co-operation
Consolidation & rehabilitation of cloister of Convent of Santa Clara, Old Havana
US$ 30,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Committee examined and approved the following 14 requests for international assistance for cultural heritage for a total of US$ 694,348, which had been recommended by the Bureau.

3.AFRICA(c).I REGIONAL Training assistance
AFRICA 2009
US$ 80,000 requested US$ 80,000 approved

The Committee approved US$ 80,000 for this training activity in the sub-Saharan African region bearing in mind that the activity would be implemented by the World Heritage Centre, ICCROM and CRATerreEAG.

3.AFRICA(d).III ZIMBABWE Technical Co-operation
Implementation of a management plan for Khami Ruins
US$ 50,300 requested US$ 50,300 approved

The Committee approved US$ 50,300 for this activity, requesting the National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe to support the cost of connectivity of Internet after the year 2000 and to submit to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee, a report on the conservation, monitoring and management activities carried out at Khami in 1999 and 2000.

3.ARAB(c).I SYRIA Training assistance
Seminar on cultural tourism, sustainable development and management of World Heritage sites
US$ 58,000 requested US$ 35,000 approved

ICCROM presented its evaluation of the request, which was received on 17 November 1999. Although ICCROM viewed the objectives and themes of the proposed seminar positively, ICCROM presented some reservations concerning the schedule, participants and amount of funds requested for the seminar. Upon review of documentation and discussion with the World Heritage Centre, ICCROM recommended approval of US$ 35,000 subject to the State Party agreeing to the following points:

1. the structure of the seminar is improved to provide maximum impact;
2. concrete desired outputs are developed to ensure that the seminar will have relevance beyond the end of the meeting;
3. the proposed budget is reviewed to ensure that costs are realistic.

ICCROM extended its advisory services, if desired, to consult with the State Party to reformulate the programme as appropriate. The Committee approved US$ 35,000, subject to the State Party reformulating the programme and budget in consultation with ICCROM.

3.ARAB(c).II TUNISIA Training assistance
Training and information international workshop for protecting Carthage
US$ 50,000 requested US$ 40,000 approved

ICCROM offered its full support for the excellent initiative proposed by the request. However, ICCROM noted that the request provided insufficient information concerning participants, resource persons, training plan, and budget. Therefore, ICCROM, while supporting the request in principle, recommended that the request be referred back to the State Party for additional information. ICOMOS reiterated the comments of ICCROM. In light of the fact that the proposed activity would benefit the conservation of Carthage, underlined that ICOMOS should have been consulted in evaluating the request. The Committee referred the request, asking the State Party to undertake consultations with ICOMOS and ICCROM for reformulating the proposed activity. The Committee approved US$ 40,000 subject to the State Party reformulating the proposal in close co-operation with the advisory bodies.

3.ARAB(d).I EGPYT Technical Co-operation
Rehabilitation of Islamic Cairo
US$ 100,000 requested US$ 80,000 approved

ICOMOS informed the Committee that the request was transmitted very late, posing difficulties in the evaluation of the request. However, in light of the threats facing Islamic Cairo, ICOMOS recommended approval to the suggestion by the Secretariat for a reduced amount of US$ 80,000 to be approved by the Committee. ICCROM informed the Committee that it did not receive the request for evaluation, although it was indicated in the working document that it had been transmitted to ICCROM. The Chairperson expressed his concern over the large amount being requested, although he stated that he had strongly supported the first phase of this request in 1998 during the twenty-second session of the Committee. The Committee decided to approve US$ 80,000, subject to the State Party providing further information on the details of the activities to the Advisory Bodies and approval of a revised budget by the Chairperson of the Committee.

3.ARAB(d).II LEBANON Technical Co-operation
Restoration works for the Monasteries of Ouadi Quadisha and Forest of the Cedars of God
US$ 50,000 requested US$ 35,000 approved

ICOMOS and ICCROM, upon evaluation of the request, recommended that the activity be phased over a period of two years. IUCN, noting that the request included an ecological research within the project, suggested that the item be further developed during the reformulation of the project, in consultation with IUCN and the Ministry for Environment of Lebanon-Protected Areas to better identify the natural values of the valley. Following the evaluation by IUCN, ICOMOS and ICCROM, the Committee approved US$ 35,000 for the first phase of the activity proposed to take place in year 2000, requesting the State Party to consult IUCN in undertaking the ecological research, and to consult ICOMOS and ICCROM on the international experts to be engaged for this activity. The Committee recommended that the State Party submit a request for US$ 15,000 for the second phase of the activity in year 2001.

3.ASIA(b).I VIETNAM Emergency assistance
Emergency assistance for Hue & Hoi An, following the floods of November 1999.
US$ 100,000 requested US$ 50,000 approved

The Committee recalled that it had already taken a decision to allocate US$ 50,000 during the agenda item concerning the state of conservation reports. The Committee approved US$ 50,000 to assist the State Party in the rehabilitation works of Hue and Hoi An and for the preparation of a comprehensive emergency rehabilitation programme including risk assessment and mitigation schemes.

3.ASIA(c).II. LAOS Training assistance
Plain of Jars archaeological survey and documentation
US$ 83,055 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Committee approved US$ 30,000, requesting the State Party to revise the budget in co-operation with the UNESCO Bangkok Office, or to find co-financing from other extrabudgetary sources.

3.ASIA(c).VI UZBEKISTAN Training assistance
Training Workshop in the Preparation of the World Heritage Nomination Files on Urban Heritage Sites
US$ 41,000 requested US$ 30,000 approved

The Secretariat informed the Committee that this request had been prepared by the State Party and the World Heritage Centre during the Committee session, and submitted on 2 December 1999. ICCROM and ICOMOS, who had received the request for evaluation at the last minute, noted that the activity could be viewed as a preparatory assistance request as the training was to prepare nomination forms for submission to the Committee. ICCROM noted that the training activity could be designed to benefit site managers for urban conservation, and with the exception of the documentation costs for the nomination dossier, found the budget for training to be well detailed and reasonable. Both ICOMOS and ICCROM recommended approval of US$ 30,000 for the training activity. The Committee approved US$ 30,000 for the activity.

XV.7 The Committee noted that the last-minute submissions of international assistance requests resulted in great constraints on the part of the Secretariat and the advisory bodies, and reiterated the need to respect deadlines in submitting requests. The Director of the World Heritage Centre underlined that this was an exceptional case, where a State Party from the under-represented Central Asian sub-region urgently required training for preparing the necessary supplementary documentation for incomplete nomination forms.

1.EUROPE(c).I HUNGARY Training assistance
ITUC training workshop for Central European Historic Cities managers
US$ 33,840 requested US$ 33,840 approved

1.EUROPE(d).I GEORGIA Technical Co-operation
Study and development of the Mtskheta Heritage and Tourism Master Plan
US$ 35,000 requested US$ 35,000 approved

The Committee approved US$ 35,000, subject to the State Party paying its outstanding dues to the World Heritage Fund for 1998 and 1999.

3.EUROPE(d).IV TURKEY Technical Co-operation
Completion of documentation of the buildings and monuments within the city walls of the Historic Centre of Istanbul site
US$ 58,376 requested US$ 35,208 approved

The Committee noted that the State Party had agreed to the revised budget proposed by the World Heritage Centre, endorsed by ICOMOS and ICCROM. The Committee therefore approved US$ 35,208.

3.LATIN(b).III MEXICO Emergency assistance
Repair and consolidate Monastery of Tochimilco, Puebla
US$ 100,000 requested US$ 100,000 approved

The Committee approved US$ 100,000 for this activity, subject to the State Party submitting a detailed budget breakdown and clarification and identification on the tasks planned, to be approved by the Chairperson.

3.LATIN(d).I COLOMBIA Technical Co-operation
Integral conservation of Cloister of San Pedro Claver of Cartagena de Indias
US$ 60,000 requested US$ 60,000 approved

The Committee noted that a detailed budget breakdown of the activities to be carried out had been submitted to the Secretariat, which found the information to be sufficient and reasonable.

XV.8 The Delegate of Hungary suggested that assistance allocated to Eastern and Central Europe be separated from Western Europe and North America in the future, to indicate how Least Developed Countries or Low-Income Countries in the Eastern and Central European sub-region were being assisted. He further emphasized that Central Asian States Parties should receive particular attention.

The requests for international assistance for cultural heritage approved by the Bureau and Committee are listed according to region and type of assistance (amounts in US dollars).

 

	Allocation for cultural heritage for 2000	Africa	Arab States	Asia & Pacific	Europe	Latin America & Caribbean
(a) Preparatory assistance	N/A	30,000 30,000 7,000		30,000
(b) Emergency assistance	N/A			50,000		100,000
(c) Training assistance	Less than 490,000	80,000	35,000 40,000	30,000 30,000 20,000 30,000 30,000	33,840
(d) Technical Co-operation	Less than 830,000	30,000 50,300	80,000 35,000		25,000 25,000 35,000 35,208	30,000 60,000
(e) Promotional
Subtotal		227,300	190,000	220,000	154,048	190,000

 

XV.9 The Committee and the Bureau together approved US$ 345,700 for natural heritage requests, US$ 30,000 for a mixed heritage request, and US$ 1,058,983 for cultural heritage requests, amounting to a total of US$ 1,434,683. Should all recommended amounts for the requests under US$ 20,000 for cultural heritage training be approved by the Chairperson, there will be virtually no funds remaining for this category of assistance for year 2000. Moreover, should all recommended amounts for preparatory assistance be approved by the Chairperson, there will remain approximately US$ 29,035 under this category of assistance, funded from the World Heritage Fund Chapter III.

XV.10 The table below (next page) indicates the amount of funds committed by the Bureau (underline) and the Committee (bold) during the twenty-third session of the Committee. The amounts to be submitted for approval by the Chairperson are indicated in italics.

 

 

	TOTAL	N A T U R AL		MIXED	C U L T U R A L		Subtotal
Type of assistance	Budget allocation for 2000	Budget allocation for 2000	Requests approved	Requests approved	Budget allocation for 2000	Requests approved	Approved (or to be approved)
Preparatory Assistance                   Subtotal	325,000	N/A	30,000 15,000       45,000	19,500 15,000       30,000       34,500 30,000	N/A.	19,094 15,924 18,085 20,000 16,362 30.000 30.000 7.000 30.000 89.465 97.000	123,965       172,000       123,965 172,000
EmergencyAssistance           Subtotal	600,000	N/A	75,000         75,000		N/A	27,248 20,216 50,000 100,000   47,464 150,000	47,464 75,000 150,000 47,.464 225,000
Training                                 Subtotal	980,000	(including US$30,000 for IUCN)     At least 490,000	20,000 20,000 20,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000                 60,000 120,000		(includingUS$ 192,635 for ICCROM)   Less than 490,000	17,000 14,800 15,000 30,000 30,000 20,000 80,000 35,000 40,000 30,000 30,000 33,840 107,635   46,800 436,475	106,800     200,000   356,475             106,800 556,475
Technical Cooperation                           Subtotal	1,245,000	At least 415,000	30,000 25,700   50,000             105,700		Less than 830,000	10,000 25,000 25,000 30,000 50,300 80,000 35,000 35,000 35,208 60,000 10,000 375,508	10,000 135,700   345,508           10,000 481,208
Promotion Subtotal	80,000	N/A			N/A	10,000 10,000	10,000 10,000
Total	3,230,000		60,000 345,700	34,500 30,000		203,729 1,058,983	298,229 1,434,683

 

XVI.DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF THE BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

XVI.1 The Committee decided that the twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau would be held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France, from 26 June to 1 July 2000. The Committee adopted the provisional agenda for the session (Annex X), including the item proposed by the Delegate of Greece (training of personnel).

XVI.2 Several delegates noted that the follow-up to the General Assembly should be included in the agenda of the Bureau and that the discussion on this agenda item should be given enough time and attention. The Delegate of Hungary informed the Committee about the Resolution Number 40 of the thirtieth session of the General Conference dealing with the proposed World Heritage Fellowship Programme. This item should be included in the agenda of the Bureau meeting in order to prepare a report to be brought to the 160^th session of the Executive Board. The Rapporteur asked for clarification whether this resolution was adopted by the Plenary session of the General Conference and whether this involved financial implications.

XVI.3 The Director of the Centre informed the Committee that, indeed, such a proposal was submitted for an amount of US$ 200,000 and that the Programme Commission IV of the General Conference of UNESCO took note of it, but that no budget allocation was made available. As a number of fellowships programmes already exist, the Centre will study the question and will report back to the next session of the Bureau. The Delegate of Thailand noted that no funds were provided for such a programme and that the Committee should not make any commitment at this stage but look further into this matter. The Delegate of Hungary noted that the resolution was adopted by the Plenary Meeting of the General Conference and that the Secretariat has to do the follow-up work and that at this stage it would not involve financial implications. He also recalled that this proposal was first presented at the session in Kyoto and is included as Annex II.4 of the report. The Delegate of Benin suggested that the Committee mandate the Chairperson to closely examine this question together with the Secretariat, and decide whether it should be studied by the Bureau as an aganda item, and that eventually an information document be prepared on the follow-up of the General Conference Resolution. This proposal was endorsed by the Chairperson and approved by the Committee. The Chairperson decided to request the Secretariat to review the situation and to report back to the next session of the Bureau.

 

XVII.DATE AND PLACE OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

XVII.1 The Chairperson recalled that the Australian Government had invited the World Heritage Committee for the year 2000 during the twentieth, twenty-first and twenty-second sessions of the Committee, as indicated in the respective reports. He also referred to official letters of invitation by the authorities of Australia and of Hungary to the Director-General of UNESCO on this matter.

XVII.2 The Delegate of Hungary announced that his Government is withdrawing its invitation to the Committee for the year 2000 and supports the Australian invitation, and that the Hungarian authorities wish to invite the World Heritage Committee for the year 2002, taking into consideration the invitation from Finland in 2001. His full statement is included in Annex XI.

XVII.3 The Delegate of Australia warmly thanked the Hungarian authorities for their understanding, and he reiterated that it would be an honour for his country host the Committee in Australia in November/December 2000. His full statement is included in Annex XII.

XVII.4 The Chairperson emphasised the immense work of the Secretariat, and suggested that two days between the extraordinary session of the Bureau and the twenty-fourth session of the Committee would allow the Secretariat to conclude its work on the Bureau and the preparations for the Committee session.

XVII.5 The Committee decided that the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau would be held in Cairns, Australia, from 23 to 24 November 2000, followed by the twenty-fourth session of the Committee, from 27 November to 2 December 2000.

XVII.6 The Delegate of Benin noted that the reports of the sessions could be much shorter and should just reflect decisions made by the Committee. The Rapporteur welcomed any suggestions to improve the quality of the reports. She noted that the actual reporting system was far from being perfect and indeed many improvements could be made in that respect. She recalled the ongoing process of improving the working methods of the Committee and its Bureau, which would bring modifications to the actual reporting system. This issue merits a thorough reflection and thus it could be referred to the task force chaired by the Delegate of Canada. The Delegate of Hungary, in highlighting his experience as Rapporteur, noted that the World Heritage Committee and Bureau reports are important documents, as they are the only ones that are available to the public. He stated that the Committee should be very careful and not introduce changes to the actual reporting system without having reflected upon it.

XVII.7 The Delegate of China informed the Committee that his Government wishes to host one of the sessions of the World Heritage Committee session, in 2003, taking into consideration the earlier invitations from Australia, Finland and Hungary. The Delegate of Benin wished that in the future there would be no misunderstandings concerning the invitations to host Committee meetings and that the Committee members would be reminded of the invitations at each of its sessions. The Chairperson thanked the Delegate of Benin for his remarks and noted that the order of invitation should be respected.

 

XVIII.OTHER BUSINESS

XVIII.1 The Chairperson informed the Bureau that an Algerian non-governmental organization, "Algerie 2000", volunteered to assist in the Periodic Reporting of the Maghreb region and that this NGO has experience, in particular in the restoration of the Kasbah of Algiers. The Committee expressed its appreciation by acclamation.

XVIII.2 The Observer of Uganda informed the Committee that the question of the involvement of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) should be reviewed, in particular with regard to the movable heritage, in particular with regard to moveable heritage and the serious problem of illicit traffic in Africa.

XVIII.3 The Observer of Poland underlined the importance of a pluridisciplinary approach in the safeguarding of heritage. The criteria of the World Heritage Convention should respect the wealth of regional diversity.

 

XIX.CLOSURE OF THE SESSION

XIX.1 The Director of the Centre, Mr. Mounir Bouchenaki, on behalf of the Director-General of UNESCO, expressed his gratitude to the Moroccan authorities for having organized and provided the facilities for this session. He thanked Morocco for the generosity and co-operation accorded to all the participants, and all members of the Committee for their constructive participation in the debates. In thanking the Rapporteur, Mr. Bouchenaki commended her hard work on the Committee report and said that the Rapporteur worked with the Centre staff from day to day and into the night. Turning to the Chairperson, Mr. Bouchenaki said that Mr. Touri, a specialized and highly experienced archaeologist who has authored several books in the field of culture and archaeology, will make positive contribution to the Convention and to the work of the Centre throughout the year 2000. The Director thanked the support staff of Morocco, the Secretariat, the interpreters and translators for the hard work and well done. He concluded by assuring the Committee that the Secretariat will do its utmost to implement the decisions of the Committee in a timely and appropriate manner.

XIX.2 The Delegate of Australia, speaking on behalf of all participants, thanked the Government of Morocco for its generous hospitality and for the excellent facilities provided. He expressed the Committee’s appreciation for the Moroccan culture and cultural traditions and commended the Government on the high standards of management and conservation of its national heritage that has contributed to the economy of Morocco.

XIX. 3 The Delegate of Portugal expressed on the behalf of his delegation the sentiments, and his gratitude on the quality of welcome, generosity and the organization of the Committee session which he said contributed to the success of the meeting. He underscored the Royal message from His Majesty the King Mohammed VI and the attendance of several Moroccan Ministers at the opening of the Committee session, which he said demonstrated the great interest Morocco attaches to the work of the Committee. Referring to the cultural heritage preservation in the country, the Delegate mentioned that Morocco is proceeding on the right direction.

XIX. 4 The Delegate of Benin joined Australia and Portugal in congratulating the Moroccan authorities. He termed the Committee report as excellent compared to previous years, timely produced and in two languages, and for this he thanked the Rapporteur, the Director and the members of the Secretariat.

XIX.5 Speaking on behalf of the African continent, the Delegate of the Republic of South Africa congratulated the Chairperson for the excellent manner in which he conducted the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee. She congratulated the Chairperson for his strategic skills, his commitment and his considerable efforts to conclude in a satisfactory way many difficult and sensitive matters discussed at the Committee session. The Delegate thanked the Director of the Centre and the members of the Secretariat. Referring to the committee report and its prompt production, the Delegate said that the World Heritage Centre was the only Centre able to utilize time economically. The Delegate concluded by thanking all the States Parties to the Convention for inscribing three South African sites in World Heritage List.

XIX. 6 The Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Mr. Abdulaziz Touri thanked His Majesty the King Mohammed VI of Morocco for honouring this Committee session with a Royal message and the Director-General of UNESCO for his presence at the opening ceremony and for his inspiring speech. He expressed the Committee’s appreciation for the work and dedication of the Director of the Centre, and all staff of the World Heritage Centre.

XIX. 7 The Chairperson thanked the Committee the Director of the Centre and staff and the Advisory Bodies for the confidence placed in him. He committed himself to furthering the work of the World Heritage Convention. Mr. Touri said that it was the spirit of cooperation, constructive attitude, and the trust bestowed upon him by the members of the Committee that contributed to the success of the meeting. He said that he enjoyed his Chairmanship that, he said, was due to enlightened participation by all Delegates. He said he believed the results of the session were attained, and felt that forty hours of was not enough to address in detail the points raised during discussions, but he raised hope for the future of the Convention.

XIX. 8 In considering that the Convention is 27 years old, Mr. Touri remarked that it was indeed clear that the Convention has evolved rapidly in response to several emerging needs that have characterized this Century. Encouraging greater synergy between the Convention and other regional and international instruments, providing opportunities of being involved in the workings of the Convention as well as ensuring the integrity of the rapidly increasing number of sites while promoting the contribution of the global heritage to the development of our nations, he said, would be the major challenge for the coming millenium. He said that it was indeed his great pleasure to have shared this session that marked an important period in the history of the Convention.

XIX. 9 Mr. Touri thanked the Rapporteur for the extensive report, the UNESCO Secretariat for its extremely hard work, as well as the Moroccan authorities and staff for contributing to the excellent preparation and development of the session. He thanked the interpreters, both from UNESCO and those provided by the host country for having facilitated simultaneous interpretation, and extended an invitation to all participants to remain in Morocco.

XIX. 10 The Chairperson declared the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee closed.

Annexes