World Heritage	7 EXT.COM	

Distribution limited	
WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/10
Paris, 18 October 2004
Original : English/French	

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL
ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD
CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Seventh Extraordinary Session

Paris, UNESCO Headquarters, Room II
6 – 11 December 2004

Item 10 of the Provisional Agenda: Performance indicators for World Heritage programmes

SUMMARY

At its 26th session, the Committee adopted four strategic objectives (or the four Cs) for the future implementation of the World Heritage Convention as follows: (i) strengthen the Credibility of the World Heritage List; (ii) ensure the effective Conservation of World Heritage properties; (iii) promote the development of effective Capacity Building in States Parties; and (iv) increase public awareness, involvement and support for World Heritage through Communication. The Committee has emphasized that the four Cs must form the basis for all performance monitoring to be carried out with regard to the implementation of the Convention. 

This document, in accordance with the Committee Decision 27 COM 20B.6, paragraph 6, proposes performance indicators and targets for Regional and Thematic Programmes. It builds on the principles used for the preparation of WHC-03/27.COM/19 (Performance Indicators to assess the implementation of the 2002 World Heritage Strategic Objectives (Credibility, Conservation, Capacity Building and Communication) submitted to the 27th session of the Committee and deferred by the Committee for consideration at its 28th session. Other documents, which are relevant to the review of this document are: WHC-04/28.COM/8 and WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/12.

Draft decision : 7 EXT.COM 10 : see point IV

This document was prepared for the 28th session of the World Heritage Committee, but was not presented, due to time constraints. 

I.	Introduction and Background

1.	At its 26th session (Budapest, June 2002; Decision 26 COM 17.1, paragraph 1), the World Heritage Committee, adopted the following four strategic objectives for guiding the future implementation of the World Heritage Convention: 

•	Strengthen the Credibility of the World Heritage List;
•	Ensure the effective Conservation of World Heritage properties;
•	Promote the development of effective Capacity Building in States Parties; and
•	Increase public awareness, involvement and support for World Heritage through Communication

2.	At its 27th session, the World Heritage Centre submitted document WHC-03/27.COM/19 describing “Performance Indicators to assess the implementation of the 2002 World Heritage Strategic Objectives (Credibility, Conservation, Capacity Building and Communications) for review by the Committee. That document contained the UNESCO 32C/5 Draft Programme and Budget 2004-2005, and performance indicators, and quantifiers for each of the four ‘Cs’, namely Credibility, Conservation, Capacity Building and Communication. The Committee however, deferred the consideration of that document to its 28th session (Decision 27 COM 19).

3.		The 32nd session of the General Conference of UNESCO (2003) approved the Programme and Budget for the biennium 2004-2005, for the Promotion and Implementation of the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972). Relevant extracts are included as document WHC-04/28.COM/8 for the 28th session of the Committee.

4.		In comparing document WHC-04/28.COM/8 with WHC-03/27.COM/19, the Committee may wish to note that the performance indicators adopted by the UNESCO General Conference are: 

a)	not aligned with the four Strategic Objectives (i.e. the four ‘Cs’); and 

b)	are linked to targets, which are less precise than those proposed by the World Heritage Centre in WHC-03/27.COM/19.

5.	For example, in the 32 C/5 Programme and Budget adopted by the UNESCO General Conference (WHC-04/28.COM/8), the number of new States Parties and the number of new Tentative Lists are cited as performance indicators for the expected result: number of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention increased and new Tentative Lists established. In the document WHC-03/27.COM/19, the World Heritage Centre had proposed, under the Strategic Objective to strengthen the Credibility of the World Heritage List, the same two performance indicators, but defined clear targets for the number of new States Parties (six) and number of new Tentative Lists (10), respectively, to be achieved during the 2004-2005 biennium.

6.	While the UNESCO General Conference has adopted a broad based approach to tracking performance, the Committee may wish to opt for more precise targets to monitor changes in performance indicators, defined with regard to each of the four Strategic Objectives, over a given period of time. Such an approach would enable the Committee to distinguish between successful, not successful or moderately successful performance categories and hence better guide the work of States Parties, the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies in implementing its Strategic Objectives. 

II.	World Heritage Programmes - Thematic and Regional

	Overview of Thematic and Regional Programmes

7.		At its 27th session in 2003, the Committee reviewed WHC-03/27.COM/20B on World Heritage Programmes which included progress reports on the following four Thematic Programmes adopted by the 25th session of the Committee (Helsinki, 2001):

a)	Safeguarding and Development of Cities;
b)	Forests;
c)	Sustainable Tourism; and
d)	Safeguarding of World Earthen Architecture.

	The same document also contained proposals for Regional Programmes for:

a)	Arab States;
b)	Africa;
c)	Action-Asia (2003-2009);
d)	World Heritage-Pacific 2009; and
e)	Capacity Building for Cultural and Natural Heritage of the Caribbean sub-region (2004-2014).

8.	Due to constraints of the total amount of World Heritage Fund available for 2004-2005, the 27th session of the Committee did not allocate budgets for any one of the four Thematic Programmes. The Committee recommended that the design, methodology and planning of the implementation of the Thematic Programmes be coordinated with existing and planned work (Decision 27 COM 20B.6, paragraph 3). When it approved the four Thematic Programmes at its 25th session (Helsinki, 2001), the Committee stressed the need to strongly link their work to the priorities it has established with regard to Global Strategy and as a result of the outcome of the Periodic Reporting exercises for the different regions. The future implementation of the Thematic Programmes would therefore have to be strongly linked to the Regional Programmes approved by the Committee at its 27th session (Paris, 2003). 

9.	The 27th session of the Committee, recognizing the growing importance of Regional Programmes, set aside budgets for each of them referred to in paragraph 7 above for the 2004-2005 biennium. Decision 27 COM 11.2, paragraph 5, items (i) – (v) and (viii) describe the budgetary allocations for these Regional Programmes. The decisions of the 27th session of the Committee on the execution of the five Regional Programmes are contained in Decisions 27 COM 20B.1 (Arab Region), 27 COM 20.B.2 (Africa Region), 27 COM 20B.3 (Action Asia 2003-2009 Programme), 27 COM 20 B.4 (World Heritage-Pacific 2009) and 27 COM 20B.5 (the Caribbean), respectively. 

10.	At its 27th session the Committee also requested the World Heritage Centre to establish performance indicators to measure the effectiveness of the Regional and Thematic Programmes for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 28th session in 2004. In arriving at this decision, the Committee referred to document WHC-03/27.COM/INF.20A, namely the Regional Programme for the Arab States, as a useful approach to establish performance indicators (Decision 27 COM 20B.6, paragraph 6). A number of insights for defining indicators and targets provided in Table 1 were derived from the document WHC-03/27.COM/INF.20A. However, the Regional Programme for the Arab States defined expected results and indicators in a manner similar to that adopted by UNESCO General Conference for Programme and Budget of the 32 C/5 (document WHC-04/28.COM/8) rather than in terms of the more quantified targets as was proposed by the World Heritage Centre in WHC-03/27.COM/19 submitted to the 27th session of the Committee.

	Proposed performance indicators for the Thematic and Regional Programmes

11.	The Committee, following from paragraph 6 above, may consider defining clear targets for indicators, with regard to each of the four Strategic Objectives, in measuring performance of Thematic and Regional Programmes. Targets need to be set in a realistic manner taking into consideration prevailing human and financial constraints. They would have to be fine-tuned periodically as new information on the implementation of the Convention becomes available. For example, at present the Convention has 178 States Parties; if 12 more UNESCO Members ratify or accept, then the Convention will become universal from a UNESCO point of view (190 Member States). If Singapore and Brunei also ratify/accept the Convention, then it will achieve universal status from an overall United Nations perspective. Of the 12 UNESCO Member States who are yet to ratify the Convention, six are in Africa (Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Equatorial Guinea, Swaziland, Guinea-Bissau and Djibouti), four in Asia-Pacific (Cook Islands, Tuvalu, East Timor and Nauru) and two in Latin America and the Caribbean (Bahamas and Trinidad and Tobago). Hence, the number of new States Parties ratifying the Convention can only be a target for Programmes in the three concerned Regions and not in others (Arab States and Europe and North America).

12.	A commitment to define targets for measuring performance could also enable refinements in the types of indicators used, as lessons are learned on the practice of implementing the Convention. For example, number of countries submitting new Tentative Lists is a frequent indicator cited as a measure of success for the Credibility of the World Heritage List. However, both ICOMOS and IUCN analyses (see documents WHC-04/28.COM/INF.13A and WHC-04/28.COM/INF.13B, respectively) of Tentative Lists submitted by States Parties have revealed that the nomination of properties from those Lists already submitted by States Parties is unlikely to bring about any major changes to the Representativity, Balance and Credibility of the World Heritage List. Future performance therefore may have to be measured not by the mere increase in the number of Tentative Lists submitted but by the quality and range of properties included in such Lists and the rate at which properties from the Tentative Lists are nominated and successfully inscribed on the World Heritage List. 

13.	The four Thematic Programmes approved by the Committee at its 25th session (see paragraph 7 above) have been developed to varying extents so far. The majority of activities within each of the four Programmes are however, confined to specific Regions or sub-Regions. For example, projects developed in tropical forests were mostly confined to Central Africa and Madagascar and ASEAN; and workshops on earthen architecture were carried out in Central Asia. Nevertheless, Thematic Programmes have enabled the Centre to better profile issues across properties and Regions and attract new partners. The funds allocated for the Sustainable Tourism Programme led to a global partnership with the Grand Circle Foundation, USA, worth US$100,000 per year for five years for the benefit of both natural and cultural heritage properties; and a Memorandum of Understanding between the Centre and Ecotourism Australia for organizing activities benefiting sustainable World Heritage tourism development in less developed countries has been established. The Cities Programme has developed co-operative relations with the UNESCO Social Sciences Sector and the United Nations Habitat Initiative and is planning to convene a major conference on World Heritage Cities in Vienna, Austria, in 2005.

14.	At the time when the 25th session of the Committee approved the four Thematic Programmes, one member of the Committee requested the development of a programme for coastal marine and small island ecosystems, stressing the need to take advantage of the attention being given to the theme by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and other environmental protection agencies. The Centre has been able to develop such a Programme as an outcome of a UNESCO-United Nations Foundation project intended, amongst others, to improve representation of tropical coastal, marine and small island properties on the World Heritage List. This Programme has thus far focused its attention largely on the Caribbean and the Pacific.

15.	Thematic Programmes serve a useful function in encouraging global networking across Regions to share lessons, experience and information. However, such global networking works better when there is a dedicated staff member in the Centre enabling exchanges between Regions, countries and sites. This has been feasible for the Sustainable Tourism and the coastal, marine and small islands ecosystems Programmes where hiring the services of dedicated staff was made possible through extra-budgetary resources. Where such a staff focal point is not available, Thematic Programme activities tend to be designed and organized mostly within specific Regional or sub-Regional contexts.

16.	Although it is likely that Programmes will continue to be largely Regional and sub-Regional in scope, communication across Regions and sub-Regions anchored on the four Themes approved by the 25th session of the Committee (Helsinki, 2001) and other themes, such as coastal, marine and small island ecosystems, may be encouraged as a preferred outcome over the long-term.

III.	Output and outcome indicators

17.	Output indicators measure success over relatively short time frames; outcome indicators however, measure broad-based impacts and improvements in the mission of the Convention over longer periods of time.

18.	With regard to measuring performance of Programmes, it is herein proposed that the Committee use output indicators on a biennial basis and outcome indicators over a six-year period, respectively, for tracking performance and achievements.

19.	Table 1 provides a selected number of output and outcome indicators that could be used to measure performance with regard to each of the four Strategic Objectives. The table is intended to be illustrative and not comprehensive. Additional indicators may have to be added to both the output and the outcome set. Targets may also have to be modified after an experimental period in order to ensure that they are not over-ambitious but realistic. 

	Figure 1 represents a visual overview of the proposed scheme's rationale. 

IV. 	Draft Decision

Draft Decision : 7 EXT.COM 10

The World Heritage Committee,

1.	Noting with interest the options for defining indicators covering different time horizons and for setting targets with varying levels of precision as presented in document WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/10 and in documents WHC-04/28.COM/8 and WHC-03/27.COM/19,

2.	Recognizing that while the performance indicators adopted by the 32nd UNESCO General Conference may be appropriate for monitoring the implementation of the Convention as part of the overall execution of the UNESCO 32C/5 Programme and Budget (document WHC-04/28.COM/8), the Committee’s monitoring of the implementation of the World Heritage Convention must be centred on performance directed to achieving the four Strategic Objectives, namely Credibility, Conservation, Capacity Building and Communication (the four Cs),

3.	Welcoming the World Heritage Centre’s proposal to distinguish between output and outcome indicators for use in tracking performance respectively over a two year (biennial) and a six year (mid-term) time interval, 

4.	Emphasizing that setting precise but realistic and measurable targets are essential for effective performance appraisals and monitoring,

5.	Approves the set of output and outcome indicators described in Table 1 of document WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/10 as a framework for performance monitoring with respect to the four Strategic Objectives set by the 26th session of the Committee (Budapest, 2002);

6.	Recommends that the World Heritage Centre co-operate with the Advisory Bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM) and relevant States Parties and partners to test the application of the output and outcome indicators to track progress of a selected number of Regional and Thematic Programmes as well as initiatives such as the PACT (Partnerships for Conservation) (document WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/12); and

7.	Requests the World Heritage Centre to prepare a consolidated report for the Committee at its 29th session in 2005 on (i) the results of testing the application of the output and outcome indicators of Regional and Thematic Programmes as well as initiatives such as the PACT, and (ii) the set of output and outcome indicators that the Committee could use for monitoring performance in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention focusing on the four Strategic Objectives for the period 2006-2011 

Table 1. Output and outcome indicators for World Heritage Programmes 

Strategic Objectives	Output indicators
(two-year period)	Outcome indicators
(six-year period)	Remarks /
Observations
	
Credibility	1.	Number of new States Parties ratifying or accepting the World Heritage Convention (target: one in Latin America and the Caribbean; two each in Asia and the Pacific and Africa, respectively)

2.	Review and revision of Tentative Lists completed and endorsed by relevant Advisory Bodies (target: two sub-regions or six countries)

3.	New nominations from countries with no properties or less than a total of three properties (target: at least three nominations representing a minimum of two different regions)

	1.	Ratification of the Convention by all UNESCO Member States (target: 12 ratifications / acceptances during the six year period)

2.	Harmonized Tentative Lists for sub-regions and countries and serial and transborder nomination opportunities identified (target: five sub-regions or 25 countries)

3.	Clear improvement in success rates of inscriptions of nominations from less developed countries and regions or categories of heritage less represented in the World Heritage List (target: at least 50% improvement from base-line, average success rate as determined for the beginning of the measurement period)

	World Heritage Centre to discuss with Brunei and Singapore, which are not Member States to UNESCO, to explore their interest in ratification of the Convention and advise the Committee on results within the first two years of the performance period. 	
Conservation	1.	Number of cases of early detection of threats due to unplanned development and prevention of potential threats to World Heritage properties (target: 10 cultural sites and five natural properties)

2.	Inclusion of properties in the List of World Heritage in Danger effectively used to develop bi- and/or multi-lateral donor support for World Heritage conservation (target: two cultural and two natural properties)

3.	Catalytic use of the World Heritage Fund for site conservation and/or national, sub-regional or international actions linked to other aspects of the Convention’s role as a tool for conservation demonstrated (target: five clear illustrations where World Heritage Fund was used to generate at least the same amount of financial contributions from other partners; five additional illustrations where a project or action initiated with the support of the World Heritage Fund is sustained for three-five years into the future through the support of other partners and/or donors)

  	1.	Number of States Parties voluntarily informing the World Heritage Centre of planned development projects with potential impacts for World Heritage conservation increased (target: 50% increase from base-line data determined at the beginning of the measurement period)

2.	Properties from the List of World Heritage in Danger rehabilitated and returned to the World Heritage List (target: at least five properties over the six year period)

3.	Catalytic and multiplier influence of the World Heritage Fund clearly recognized and established (target: A minimum match of 1:1 of World Heritage Fund at the global level: other funding sources for the full six-year period; for specific theme (e.g. forests, tourism or cities) a ratio closer to 1:2 for World Heritage Fund used: other funds and support generated will be considered more optimal	The Operational Guidelines paragraphs require States Parties to inform the Committee of planned development projects with potential threats to World Heritage. They should be communicated through official channels and via the World Heritage website	
Capacity Building 

	1.	Number of fellowships granted to conservation practitioners directly involved in World Heritage site management
  (target: 25)

2.	National, sub-regional and/or regional training and capacity building events focusing on conservation of outstanding universal value (targets: five-ten for site-conservation and management issues and an additional five-ten for identification, comparative analysis and nomination of World Heritage properties

3.	Case studies and compilations on effective use of the Convention to conserve outstanding universal value (target: at least one volume each for natural and cultural properties)

4.	Design, development, preparation and dissemination to academic and learning institutions, peer-reviewed training modules on the Convention and its implementation (target: at least three modules; one on overall aspects, and other two being specific to natural and cultural aspects)
	1.	National and/or local policy and decision makers recognize World Heritage as a important source for supporting training for site-based practitioners as evidenced through increase in demand for fellowships and more partners offering such fellowships 
(target: Demand for fellowships significantly increased; World Heritage/partner resources for 100 fellowships)

2.	World Heritage training seminars at the sub-regional and regional levels seen as high-profile event and partner support for their regularization secured (target: partner support and commitment secured for at least three regular sub-regional or regional level seminars for the next six-year period; curriculum used in seminars are standardized using case studies and modules tested in a number of similar events)

3.	Increased demand for World Heritage training modules and case studies. Increased evidence of their use in academic and learning institutions. World Heritage case studies find applications in a number of related disciplines (target: at least one partner secured for regular updating and revision of modules and case studies as well as preparing and publishing new products; three World Heritage training programmes integrated into regional training institutions)

Communication	1.	World Heritage focused events at international, regional, sub-regional and national levels
(target: two-three press releases, declarations and other communication from international, regional or national events organized by partners or other organizations recognizing contributions of World Heritage to the conservation of outstanding cultural and natural heritage)

2.	World Heritage coverage by TV, newspaper, internet and other media based institutions with significant outreach (target: two partnerships with media groups for the creation and dissemination of four products reaching an audience of at least two million)

3.	Concepts such as humankind’s shared heritage, outstanding universal value being given more public voice and credibility (target: at least two well known world leaders calling for all country’s to value World Heritage as shared heritage; at least three technical and three popular publications on the notion of outstanding universal value) 	1.	World Heritage recognized globally as a theme to be associated with by several major international conservation and development forums (target: invitation to World Heritage to be a key theme in at least two high-profile global conservation and development events)

World Heritage contributions to global conservation and development agendas widely known (at least 2 publications illustrating World Heritage contributions to achieving 

2.	Broader understanding of notions of outstanding universal value and humankind’s shared heritage (at least three global, regional or thematic events on these concepts and their adaptations and applications in different contexts; at least one partner making a significant commitment to promote World Heritage for their outstanding universal value)		

Figure 1. Visual overview of the proposed scheme's rationale