i) an additional item be added to the agenda as item 5, namely
"Report by former Chairman and Rapporteur on activities undertaken during the period September 1978-October 1979 and action to be taken thereon";

ii) items 5 and 6 of the Provisional Agenda be examined as one item, and

iii) item 14 should be reworded as follows "Support services to the Secretariat and to the advisory international organizations".

With those modifications, the Committee adopted the Agenda.

A. On criteria for the evaluation of cultural property and the processing of nominations, composed of:

Australia, Bulgaria (Chairman), Ecuador, France, Iran, Italy, Panama, United States of America, Canada (observer), ICOMOS and OMMSA.

B. On the management of the Convention and its financial implications, composed of:

Australia, France, Nepal, Pakistan, Senegal (Chairmen), Switzerland, United States of America, Yugoslavia, ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM.

C. On criteria for the evaluation of natural properties, composed of:

Australia (Chairman), France, United States of America, Canada, (observer) and IUCN.

(a) to retard the publication of the List in order to include the properties placed thereon at its third session;

(b) that the List of World Heritage in Danger and the List of properties for which international assistance has bean granted would be published as appendices of the List;

(c) that the list of properties for which international assistance has been granted would include reference to properties for which technical assistance has been granted but would make no mention of preparatory assistance;

(d) to publish the full list once every two years.

(a) that the World Heritage Emblem should not be used for any commercial purposes unless the Committee has given its authorization; and

(b) that the name, symbol or depiction of any property inscribed on the World Heritage List or, of any element thereof should not be used for commercial purposes unless written authorization has been received from the State concerned on the principle of using the said name, symbol or depiction and unless the exact text or display has been approved by that State and as far as possible by the national authority specifically concerned with the protection of the site; such utilization should be in conformity with the reasons for which the property has been placed on the World Heritage List;

(c) to accept the proposal from Upsala Ekeby as set out in the Annex to document CC-79/CONF.003/6.1, authorizing the firm to use the World Heritage Emblem and the name of the Convention on a series of silver spoons and the glassware, subject to the stipulation formulated in paragraph (b) above and on condition that the company was not given exclusive rights to use the emblem and the name of the Convention on articles of the type proposed; it is however understood that the company will retain exclusive rights on its own design as foreseen in international agreements on the protection of industrial property.

Estimated cost($)

(a) creation of a photo library of world heritage sites 9,600

(b) slide series and sound-track 7,000

(c) poster 7,500

(d) postcards 4,000

(e) journalists' seminars 2,800

(f) postage stamps 6'000

// $36,900

"Where the intrinsic qualities of a World Heritage site are threatened by action or works of man and yet meet the criteria set out in paragraph 10, an action plan outlining the corrective measures required shall be submitted with the nomination form. Should the corrective measures submitted by the nominating State not be taken within the time proposed by that State, the site will be considered by the Committee for delisting in accordance with the procedure adopted by the Committee."

(i) States Parties may propose in one single nomination several individual cultural properties, which may be in different geographical locations but which should:

-be linked because they belong to the same historico-cultural group, or
-be the subject of a single safeguarding project, or
-belong to the same type of property characteristic of the zone.

the geographical zone in which these properties are situated should be delimited and the cultural properties individually described and also precisely localized.

Each State Party submits only the cultural properties situated on its territory (even if these properties belong to an ensemble which goes beyond its borders) but it may come to an agreement with another State Party in order to make a joint submission.

(ii) In its justification of the outstanding universal value of the property nominated, each State should, whenever possible, undertake a sufficiently wide comparison;

(iii) The Committee should not take into consideration nominations of immovable property which are likely to become movable.

(iv) The authenticity of a cultural property remains an essential criterion.

(v) Particular attention should be given to cases which fall under criterion (vi) so that the net result would not be a reduction in the value of the List, due to the large potential number of nominations as well as to political difficulties. Nominations concerning, in particular, historical events or famous people could be strongly influenced by nationalism or other particularisms in contradiction with the objectives of the World Heritage Convention.

"In cases of migratory species, integrity will require critical areas necessary for the survival of the species to be included in the nomination. States which are parties to the Convention are requested to seek the co-operation of other States which contain seasonable sites for populations of World Heritage species so as to ensure that these species are protected throughout their full life cycle. Agreements of this nature should be noted in the nomination".

No. Name of property / State Party
___________________________________________

19 Fasil Ghebbi, Gondar Region / Ethiopia

20 Ancient City of Damascus Syrian / Arab Republic

The Committee noted the reservation expressed by ICOMOS concerning the threat to the site from rapid urban development.

31 Auschwitz concentration camp / Poland

The Committee decided to enter Auschwitz concentration camp on the List as a unique site and to restrict the inscription of other sites of a similar nature.

33 Bialowieza National Park / Poland

34 Forts and Castles, Volta Greater Accra,Central and Western Regions / Ghana

36 Medina of Tunis / Tunisia

37 Site of Carthage / Tunisia

38 Amphitheatre of El Jem / Tunisia

39 Ngorongoro conservation area / Tanzania

42 Boyana Church / Bulgaria

43 Madara Rider / Bulgaria

44 Thracian tomb of Kazanlak / Bulgaria

45 Rock-hewn churches of Ivanovo / Bulgaria

58 Urnes Stave Church /  Norway

59 Bryggen / Norway

63 Virunga national park / Zaire (Democratic Republic of Congo)

64 Tikal national park / Guatemala

The Committee learned of a tourism development project in the park and expressed the hope that the planned construction would not jeopardize the cultural and natural value of the site.

65 Antigua Guatemala / Guatemala

71 Dinosaur provincial park / Canada

72 Kluane national Park, Wrangell-
St. Elias National monument / Canada & USA

75 Grand Canyon national park / USA

76 Everglades national park / USA

78 Independence Hall / USA

80 Mont St-Michel and its Bay / France

81 Chartres Cathedral / France

83 Palace and Park of Versailles / France

84 Vezelay, Church and Hill / France

85 Decorated grottoes of the Vezere Valley / France

86 Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid fields from Giza to Dahshur / Egypt

The Committee took note of the ICOMOS proposal that a safeguarding plan for the environment of the pyramids should be drawn up.

87 Ancient Thebes with its Necropolis / Egypt

88 The Nubian monuments from Abu Simbel to Philae / Egypt

89 Islamic Cairo / Egypt

Note was taken of the concern expressed by ICOMOS at the problems involved in safeguarding this site.

90 Abu Mena / Egypt

94 Rock drawings in Valcamonica / Italy

95 Old City of Dubrovnik / Yugoslavia

96 Stari Ras and Sopocani / Yugoslavia

97 Historical complex of Split with the Palace of Diocletian / Yugoslavia

98 Plitvice lakes national park / Yugoslavia

99 Lake Ohrid (that part which lies in Yugoslavia) / Yugoslavia

The Committee decided to inscribe this site on the List in view of the assurances received concerning the integrity of the Lake as a whole.

113 Tchogha Zanbil /  Iran

114 Persepolis / Iran

115 Meidan-e Shah Esfahan / Iran

120 Sagarmatha National Park / Nepal

121 Kathmandu Valley / Nepal

125 Natural and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor / Yugoslavia

Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the Committee decided to enter this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger as requested by the State Part concerned.

No. Name of property / State Party

8 Ichkeul National park / Tunisia

The Committee deferred this nomination until the Tunisian Government has contacted the other States concerned to ensure adequate protection of summering and wintering areas of major migratory species found in Ichkeul.

79 Paphos, Birthplace of Aphrodite / Cyprus

The Committee deferred this nomination until more precise information was available on the possible adverse impact on the sites of the pressing needs of tourism development.

92 Sta. Giulia/St. Salvator's Monastery / Italy

The Committee heard the comments of ICOMOS which referred to the outstanding universal value of the property. However, ICOMOS was concerned by the fact that the property had not been presented in the more general context of the cultural heritage of the country as a whole. While recognizing the value of the site nominated, the Committee decided to defer a decision until indications had been received from the Italian Government on the properties situated in Italy which it was considering nominating to the List.

No. 5: Zembra and Zembretta Islands National Park (Tunisia) and
No. 73: the Madeleine Island (Senegal).

(a) Ecuador

Equipment to enable the authorities to ensure the integrity of tho natural environment of the Galapagos Islands through protective measures.

up to a maximum of $50,000

(b) Tanzania

Services of an architect-museologist for three weeks in order to draw up a project for the conservation and presentation of the prehistoric sites of Olduvai and Laetolil.

estimated cost $5,400

(c) Egypt

Services of specialists in cultural heritage as well as equipment to draw up a project for the restoration and development of the Islamic Centre of Cairo.

up to a maximum of $ 30,000

(a) the text should be revised to reflect the decisions taken by the Committee on the criteria for the inclusion of properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations (see session XI above); the attention of States Parties should be drawn, in particular, to the essential criterion of outstanding universal value that should be met by properties nominated;

(b) The form should emphasize the importance of adequate buffer zones and ask for details on measures taken by the State Party on the establishment of such zones.

(c) A provision would be added inviting States to prepare a brief summary of each nomination for reproduction and for distribution to members of the Committee.

i) The Convention was now entering its operational phase particularly as regards technical co-operation, emergency assistance and the training of specialists, which implied a considerable increase in the workload of the Secretariat. An amount of approximately $210,000 had been spent by the Unesco Secretariat in 1979 under its Regular Budget for the management of the Convention.

ii) Funds actually obligated in 1979 under the World Heritage Fund for programme support were as follows:

ICOMOS $ 15,600
IUCN $ 6,000
Temporary assistance to the Secretariat $ 59,000
________

$ 80,600

iii) The representatives of ICOMOS and IUCN explained that they had received funds under a lump-sum arrangement depending on the number of nominations examined but that this approach did not enable the Organizations to assure proper processing of the files and their continuous participation in the management of the Convention. They indicated that the direct contributions of their organizations to the management of the Convention could be estimated at $30,000 and $12,500 respectively in 1979.

a) that it was not opportune at the present time to retain a fixed percentage such as 14%, as indicated in paragraph 26 of document CC-79/CONF.003/12, to cover direct management costs of the Convention;

b) to ask the Director-General of Unesco to make additional efforts to provide the Secretariat with an adequate permanent staff to enable it to meet the substantial increase in workload due to the fact that the Convention has now entered its operational phase. Until the Secretariat could be fully constituted and a sufficient number of Member States ratified the Convention, the Committee considered it necessary to continue to provide for temporary assistance for the Secretariat and decided to review this question at its next session;

c) that with respect to temporary assistance and the processing of files by the advisory organizations, only a limited number of files could be processed between two Committee sessions,and therefore no allocation per nomination file should be made.

d) to allocate the following funds for programme support for the implementation of the Convention:

- for the Secretariat: under temporary assistance. .. $ 70,000

of which $40,000 for two consultants each for 6 m/m, one consultant for the cultural part, and one consultant for the natural part, and $30,000 for two(part-time) secretaries-documentalists

for IUCN ..$ 12,000

of which $4,000 for evaluation of files based on approximately 20 files,

$2,500 for travel and per diem costs for participation in meetings of the Bureau,

$2,500 for promotion of the Convention and, if necessary, field visits,

$3,000 for professional experts in the evaluation of the nominations

for ICOMOS ..$ 30,000

of which $20,000 for a part-time co-ordinator to evaluate nominations based on approximately 80 files,

$10,000 for one third of a full-time secretary and miscellaneous secretariat expenditures.

//$112,000

BUDGET (October 1979 - December 1980)

Activities / Brought forward from 1978-1979 / Additional funds allocated / Total funds authorized for period October 78- December 80

I. Preparatory Assistance / $69,234 /$ 80,000 / $ 149,234 (30 m/m)

II. Technical Co-operation / -- / $165,400 / $ 165,400

III. Training / $4,700 / $ 200,000 / $ 204,700

IV. Emergency / $ 70,000 / $ 100,000 / $ 170,000

V. Promotional Activities / $ 500 / $ 36,400 / $ 36,900

VI. Programme Support

- ICOMOS } / $ -3,600 / $ 45,600 / $ 42,000 ($ 12,000 IUCN)
- IUCN }      /  (deficit) /               /              ($ 30,000 ICOMOS)

VII. Temporary Assistance to the Secretariat

                  /      --     / 70,000  / 70,000

                  //140,834 / 697,400 / 838,234

Contingencies: 3% of total funds authorized

(i) that in future a quorum for a meeting of the Committee should require, in addition to a majority of States Members at least five delegates among the delegations with expertise in natural heritage; and

(ii) that, in allocating funds for assistance to States, not more than 60% should be allocated to either cultural or natural properties.