Distribution: Limited SC/89/CONF.003/12
19 September 1989
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
Bureau of the World Heritage Committee
Thirteenth session
Unesco Headquarters, Paris, 27-30 June 1989
REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The thirteenth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage
Committee was held at Unesco Headquarters in Paris from 27 to 30
June 1989. It was attended by the members of the Bureau: Mr. A. C.
Da Silva Telles (Brazil), Chairman; Mrs. A. Miltiadou (Greece),
Rapporteur, and representatives of Australia, Canada, France, India
and the Arab Republic of Yemen, Vice-Chairpersons.
2. Representatives of the following States Parties to the
Convention attended the meeting of the Bureau as observers:
Bulgaria, Colombia, Hungary, Turkey and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics.
3. Representatives of the International Centre for the Study of the
Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Properties (ICCROM), the
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World
Conservation Union (IUCN) also attended the meeting in an advisory
capacity.
II. OPENING SESSION
4. The Representative of the Director-General, Mr. S. Dumitrescu,
Assistant Director-General, Science Sector, welcomed the members of
the Bureau, representatives of observing States Parties, as well as
of the advisory non-governmental organizations, ICOMOS, IUCN and
ICCROM. Mr. Dumitrescu underlined the importance of the work of the
Convention, which had been fully acknowledged recently at the
occasion of the Unesco Executive Board at its 131st session. He
drew the attention of the Bureau to the fact that the Director-
General wanted very much to strengthen the Secretariat in terms of
quantity and quality. In response to the request made by Mr. J.
Collinson, Chairman of the World Heritage Committee in June 1988,
and reiterated by his successor, Mr. A. C. Da Silva Tella in
December 1988, he had therefore decided to include proposals for
the creation of six additional posts to service the World Heritage
Secretariat in the Unesco Draft Programme and Budget for 1990/91.
This proposal will be presented for adoption by the Member States
at the forthcoming twenty-fifth Unesco General Conference in
October-November 1989. After mentioning that 109 States Parties had
ratified the Convention, Mr. Dumitrescu pointed out that several
Unesco Member States, such as Botswana, Indonesia and Venezuela,
were likely to become States Parties to the Convention in the near
future. He then provided 8 brief outline of the tasks facing the
Bureau during the next three days and assured the Bureau that the
Secretariat would do its utmost to help the Bureau in its work. Mr.
Dumitrescu concluded his remarks by wishing the Bureau and other
participants a successful meeting.
5.The Bureau adopted the provisional agenda with one amendment.
*[2]
III. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE TWELFTH SESSION OF
THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
6. The Secretary for the session, Ms. I. Robertson Vernhes,
provided a brief report on the activities undertaken by the
Secretariat since the last session of the Committee held in
Brasilia in December 1988.
7. The Bureau took note of the fact that, as requested by the
Committee at its last session, the Secretariat had presented as
part of working document SC-89/CONF.003/3 drafts of revised
nomination forms and forms for requesting international assistance
from the World Heritage Fund. These revisions had been undertaken
to ensure that these forms conform to the Operational Guidelines
for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, a revised
version of which was adopted at the last session of the Committee.
8. The Bureau noted with satisfaction that implementation of all
international assistance projects approved by the Committee at its
last session was now in progress. Furthermore, the Bureau noted
that the Secretariat had collaborated with the International
Geological Correlation Programme (IGCP) of Unesco and the
International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS, an affiliate of
ICSU) to identify a consultant who is working with a network of
international experts to draw up a draft list of fossil and
geological sites which would meet criterion (i) (the earth's
evolutionary history) and criterion (ii) (on-going geological
processes). The draft list is expected to be ready by end 1989 and
will be submitted for technical review at the annual meeting of the
IGCP scheduled for 29 January-1 February 1990. The Bureau noted
that the draft list and the IGCP technical review will be ready for
presentation to the Bureau at its fourteenth session and, if
endorsed by the Committee, could serve as a reference for IUCN to
undertake evaluations of geological sites in consultation with IGCP
and IUGS.
9. Finally, the Bureau noted with satisfaction that the Convention
was being increasingly known among all Unesco Member States due to
several promotional activities undertaken by the Secretariat and
which were presented as part of working document SC-89/CONF.003/9.
IV. MONITORING THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL
WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTIES AND RELATED TECHNICAL PROBLEMS
10. The Secretariat recalled that the question of monitoring the
state of conservation of cultural properties will be examined in
1990, at the fourteenth session of the Bureau, in conformity with
the time-table adopted by the Committee at its twelfth session.
11. The representative of IUCN presented reports on 16 sites, most
of which were documented in SC-89/CONF.003/2.
A. PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER
1) Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania)
The Bureau was glad to learn that, thanks in part to support
provided under the World Heritage Fund, the situation of this
site had greatly improved. The Bureau re-considered this
matter under the agenda item concerning nominations/exclusion
from the List of World Heritage in Danger (see paragraph
XI.28.C.).
2) Garamba National Park (Zaire)
The joint project to rehabilitate this Park run by the
Frankfurt Zoological Society/WWF/World Heritage Fund met with
considerable success since no more rhinoceros have been
poached in the last 5 years, the rhinoceros population has
increased by 50% and a better management regime has been
established. The Park recently celebrated the 50th anniversary
since its foundation. The Bureau noted this situation with
satisfaction and recommended that the property be re-examined
in 1990: if the situation *[3] continued to show improvement,
steps should be taken to initiate the removal of the site from
the List of World Heritage in Danger.
B. OTHER NATURAL PROPERTIES
3) Tai National Park (Côte d'Ivoire)
The Bureau recalled that IUCN had reported on the
deteriorating situation of this site on several occasions and
that the Committee had requested the Ivoirian authorities to
propose its inscription on the List of World Heritage in
Danger. It noted that the Secretariat had contacted the
Ivoirian authorities, but that only recently a response had
been obtained in the form of a request for preparatory
assistance in order to prepare a technical cooperation request
for an integrated project addressing the need for increased
protection of the natural values of this Park and also the
socio-economic problems. The contribution of the World
Heritage Fund would be used in a catalytic manner adding on to
other funding sources such as UNDP. The Bureau requested the
Secretariat to follow this matter and consult with IUCN in the
preparation of the integrated project for technical
cooperation.
4) Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal)
The Bureau was informed of the project to construct a major
highway across the Park, which would be financed by a number
of Development Banks. Several impact studies - some
contradictory in their conclusions - had been made: the Bureau
expressed its preference for the alternative route outside of
the Park to the North, which in addition to preserving the
natural values of Niokolo-Koba, would serve to link up
isolated villages. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to
prepare a letter to the highest authority in Senegal recalling
this State Party's obligation to protect the natural values
for which Niokolo-Koba was inscribed on the World Heritage
List and expressing the Bureau's strong preference for the
alternative route outside the Park.
5) Mana Pools, Sapi and Chewore Reserves (Zimbabwe)
The Bureau wished firstly to commend the Zimbabwean
authorities for their efforts to protect the remaining
rhinoceros and elephant populations. The Bureau expressed
great concern however over the proposed oil exploration
programme, particularly in the light of a very negative report
submitted to the Secretariat by the Zimbabwe National
Commission for Unesco. The Bureau therefore requested the
Secretariat to convey its concern to the highest government
authorities of Zimbabwe, as well as to the Director of Mobil
Oil Company.
6) Sangay Park (Ecuador)
The Bureau learned of several threats to this site, including
a proposal to excise a large section of land for settlement.
The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact the Ecuadorian
authorities to express its concern over the proposed excision
and to encourage them to draw up a request for technical
cooperation to support the elaboration of a revised management
plan addressing many of the conflicting issues in the Park.
The Bureau hoped that the request for technical cooperation
could be submitted in time for examination by the Committee in
December 1989.
7) Iguazu National Park (Argentina) / Iguaçu National Park
(Brazil)
The Bureau noted with satisfaction that the two States Parties
had recently undertaken measures to coordinate the management
and protection of these contiguous parks containing the famous
waterfalls. In response to the suggestion of the IUCN
representative to encourage the States Parties' acceptance to
list these waterfalls under one name on the World Heritage
List, the representative of Brazil stated that his government
had not changed its position on this matter and that the two
sites should continue to be indicated separately on the World
Heritage List.
*[4]
8) Mount Nimba (Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea)
The Bureau noted that the preparatory assistance mission to
this site in November 1988 had resulted in the elaboration of
a two-year Unesco/UNDP project on evaluating the impact of
iron-ore extraction on the natural values of the site and
elaborating an integrated management plan which would improve
protective measures and encourage socio-economic development
of the transition zone. The Bureau nevertheless wished to
express its concern about further damage to this site and
suggested that this concern be communicated to the World Bank.
9) Yellowstone National Park (USA)
Following a request of the Committee on 21 April 1989, the
American authorities submitted a report on the fire management
policy review and the recovery plan following the 1988
wildfires. The Bureau wished to thank the American authorities
for this report and for their offer to make it available for
other States Parties.
10) Manas Game Sanctuary (India)
The Bureau noted that this site had recently been invaded by
several hundreds of local people which had caused great damage
to the park and the loss of several lives. The Indian
authorities had sent in the police to halt further
destruction, but the problem of illegal encroachment was still
not resolved. The Bureau requested the Secretariat to contact
the Indian authorities to express its concern over this
situation and encourage taking appropriate measures to restore
the site.
11) Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia)
The Bureau was informed by the representative of the
Government of Australia of proceedings instituted against it
before the Federal Court by the Government of Queensland with
respect to the protection of the site of the Wet Tropics of
Queensland inscribed on the World Heritage List in December
1988. The judge of the Federal Court is called upon to examine
the question whether the ban decided by the Federal Government
on commercial forestry operations in the site can reasonably
be regarded as appropriate and adapted to the objectives of
protecting, conserving, enhancing and rehabilitating the Wet
Tropics of Queensland (World Heritage site).
The Federal Government of Australia wishes that Mr. James
Thorsell of IUCN, who led the evaluation of the site upon
which the Committee based its decision to inscribe this site
on the World Heritage List, give scientific and technical
advice on the question brought before the Court. The Bureau
considered that IUCN has a consultative role with respect to
natural World Heritage sites. It would be concerned if
scientific advice from this body could be interpreted as
implicating the Committee in a national legal proceeding.
In the event that IUCN decides to give such advice, the Bureau
wished to affirm that this advice should not be interpreted as
a mandate from the Committee to justify the inscription of the
site on the World Heritage List.
Furthermore, the Bureau expressed its concern about
maintaining the integrity of the site.
12) The IUCN representative also gave reports on the conservation
status of Rio Platano (Honduras), Manu National Park (Peru),
Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia), Sagarmatha (Nepal), Wood
Buffalo National Park (Canada).
*[5]
V. REVISION OF NOMINATION FORMS AND FORMS FOR REQUESTING
INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND
12. The Secretary introduced document SC-89/CONF.003/3 under this
agenda item and drew the attention of the Bureau to the fact that
the revised forms were drafts and, owing to time constraints, the
French version had been prepared within the Secretariat and not
with the help of translation services of Unesco. Furthermore, the
Bureau was also informed that, in accordance with the revised
"Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention" (December 1988), separate forms for requesting
international assistance for technical cooperation, training,
preparatory assistance and emergency assistance had been prepared.
13. The Bureau decided that its members should send written
comments on the drafts of all revised forms to the Secretariat
before 15 September 1989. The suggestions and comments of the
members of the Bureau would be incorporated by the Secretariat in
drafts which are to be submitted to the World Heritage Committee at
its thirteenth session in December 1989. The Committee, on the
basis of the contents of those revised drafts and deliberations
during its session, would decide whether the forms could be
immediately adopted or revised further to improve clarity and
precision.
VI. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
14. The Bureau approved the following requests for international
assistance for conducting regional training workshops in the field
of natural heritage conservation and protected area management.
A. Qatar (for the Arab Region), 7-20 October 1989. US$30,000
B. College of African Wildlife Management, Mweka US$30,000
United Republic of Tanzania (for anglophone
African countries), in February 1990.
C. The Ministry of Nature Protection and the US$30,000
Department of National Parks, Senegal (for
francophone African countries), in Dakar and
Saint Louis, 30 October to 17 November 1989.
15. The Bureau reviewed another request from Tanzania, for the
purchase of equipment for protecting the archaeological and
palaeontological site of Olduvai Gorge in the Ngorongoro
Conservation Area of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Bureau,
however, deferred its recommendations on this request, since the
site had been inscribed on the World Heritage List under natural
criteria. The Bureau, though, suggested that ICOMOS and the
Secretariat provide further information on the relevance of
cultural values for the inscription of this site on the World
Heritage List at the forthcoming meeting of the Bureau and,
subsequently, at the session of the Committee. The Bureau also
considered the desirability of revising the criteria under which
certain properties had previously been included, in order to
determine whether other cultural or natural criteria did not also
apply.
16. The Bureau heard details of an application for technical
assistance amounting to about US$320,000 submitted by the Syrian
Arab Republic for a conservation programme for the Old City of
Aleppo. The Bureau agreed to grant the Syrian authorities
preparatory assistance to enable them to draw up a large-scale
project for submission to funding sources other than the World
Heritage Fund, the resources of which were too limited to take on
such a project.
17. The Bureau was informed that an ICOMOS mission was scheduled to
visit the Wieliczka Salt Mines (Poland) in early July 1989. On the
basis of the findings of this mission, a request for technical
cooperation would be prepared and transmitted for the consideration
of the Bureau and of the Committee at their December session.
*[6]
VII. SITUATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND
18. The Bureau took note of document SC-89/CONF.003/5 presenting
the state of the Fund, notably the state of payment of mandatory
and voluntary contributions to the Fund. The Secretary informed the
Bureau that since the accounts had been drawn up as at 31 May 1989,
mandatory contributions had been received from Bangladesh, Italy
and Morocco and France had made its voluntary contribution for
1989. The Bureau expressed concern that a good many mandatory
contributions had not yet been received for 1989 and hoped that
these would be made in time for the 7th General Assembly of States
Parties to be held during the twenty-fifth Unesco General
Conference in October/November 1989. Indeed, it was recalled that
in accordance with Article 16 (5) of the Convention, any State
Party which is in arrears with the payment of its compulsory or
voluntary contribution for the current year and the calendar year
immediately preceding it shall not be eligible as a Member of the
Committee.
19. The Bureau took note of the state of implementation of the
various international assistance projects financed under the World
Heritage Fund and also of the state of the budget approved for
1989. For this, it highlighted the fact that funds were being used
up relatively more quickly than in previous years. It requested
that Annex VII of the working document be completed to show clearly
the amount of US$20,000 put aside for global studies, as well as
the contingency funds and the reserve. The completed Annex VII was
distributed to the members of the Bureau.
20. It had been noted that funds for temporary assistance for the
implementation of the Convention had not been allocated in a
balanced way between the natural heritage and the cultural
heritage. The Bureau therefore authorized the Secretariat to use,
for the implementation of the cultural part of the Convention,
US$25,000 (from the 3 per cent contingency reserve) to fund
temporary assistance pending the creation of the additional posts
mentioned earlier, which would be funded under the regular
programme.
VIII. GLOBAL STUDY
21. The representative of the Director-General spoke of the
difficulties encountered in preparing the global study of
fundamental principles and criteria for the inscription of property
on the World Heritage List, that the Committee had wished to see
begun in 1989 and for which it had allocated a sum of US$20,000.
22. She expressed the wish that the Bureau would clarify the
guidelines so far drawn up. A better definition of the parameters
of the study was required so that it would have both the
retrospective and forward-looking character desired by the
Committee. The members of the Bureau considered that a preliminary
phase covering examination of the indicative lists and the grouping
into categories of the 315 inscribed sites would make it possible
for themes on which the survey might be based to emerge. The Bureau
also considered that ICOMOS should be in a position to submit to
the next session of the Committee a general outline of work for
that preliminary phase, together with a funding plan. It also
considered it desirable for ICOMOS to start one or more of the
thematic surveys mentioned in Brasilia on rural landscapes,
traditional villages and contemporary architecture. The work could
be financed from the US$20,000 allocated for that purpose by the
Committee.
IX. NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
AND TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER
23. The Bureau examined 20 nominations of cultural properties to
the World Heritage List. It recommended that the Committee inscribe
5 properties on the List (section A) and defer the examination of
6 properties (section B). In addition, it recommended that the
Committee should not inscribe 9 properties (section C). The Bureau
also considered 2 nominations to the List of World Heritage in
Danger (section D).
*[7]
A. Properties recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List
Name of Property Identification Contracting Criteria
No. State
having submitted
the nomination of
the property in
accordance with
the Convention
Monastery of 518 Spain C(i)(iv)
Poblet
The Bureau recommended that this property be inscribed, on condition that the
Spanish authorities extend the perimeter of protection to the outer walls of the
monastery and that they provide assurances on the adequate protection of the
whole area nominated. Furthermore, the Bureau was worried about the restoration
policy applied until now, and recommended that future restoration work should
respect the original materials and forms.
Archaeological site 517 Greece C(i)(ii)
of Olympia (iii)(iv)(vi)
The Bureau recommended that this property be inscribed, and invited the Committee
to request the Greek authorities to continue to protect carefully the site and
its environment from the effects of increased tourism.
Buddhist Monuments 524 India C(i)(ii)
at Sanchi (iii)(iv)(vi)
Cliff of Bandiagara 516 Mali C(v)
The Bureau recommended inscription of this property under cultural criterion (v).
Furthermore, it asked IUCN to check whether natural criterion (iii) would apply
to this site, and to make its evaluation known to the Bureau at its special
meeting in December and subsequently to the Committee. In addition, the Bureau
recommended that the Committee request the Malian authorities to protect
carefully this site and its environment which are particularly vulnerable. The
Bureau also expressed its concern about the effects of increased tourism.
Alcobaça Monastery 505 Portugal C(i)(iv)
B. Nominations deferred by the Bureau
Lorsch Monastery 515 Germany (Fed. Rep. of)
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred, to
enable the authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany to extend the perimeter
of the area nominated to the old outer walls of the monastery, and to provide
complementary information on the protection measures of this complex, on the
state of the excavations, on the development works and, in particular, on the
installation of a site museum.
Mystras 511 Greece
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred until
the necessary information on the conservation policy applied to the ruins of
Mystras and, in particular, on the restoration projects of the Byzantine Palace,
is received. In the event this information is received by the fall, ICOMOS was
requested to review it and present its *[8] findings for consideration by the
Bureau in December. The Bureau could then formulate a recommendation to the
Committee.
Archaeological site 525 Greece
of Akrotiri in Santorin
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred until
the Greek authorities were able to nominate the whole island of Santorin
(including the archaeological site of Thera and the Oia and Phira villages which
are already on the Greek tentative list of cultural properties), and to provide
all the necessary information concerning the global protection of the island.
Furthermore, the Bureau recommended that IUCN be asked to undertake an additional
evaluation of the natural aspects of this property.
Cambridge Colleges 523 United Kingdom
and the Backs
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred to
enable the authorities of the United Kingdom to propose a less restrictive
delimitation of this property, so as to allow it to keep the coherence of a
prestigious university town.
Maes Howe and Brogar, 514 United Kingdom
Orkney Islands
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred to
enable the authorities of the United Kingdom to propose a less restrictive
delimitation of this property, and to provide assurances that the entire area
nominated is adequately protected.
Sumela Monastery 510 Turkey
The Bureau recommended that the examination of this nomination be deferred in
order to give ICOMOS the necessary time to further study this property in
comparison with other sites of the same type. In the meantime, the Committee
could invite the Turkish authorities to provide all useful information on the
nature of the protection granted to the monastery and its environment and on the
restoration works which will be carried out on the site.
C. Properties not recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List
24. Although the Bureau recognized the importance of the properties listed
hereunder for the cultural heritage of the States concerned, it considered that
these sites did not meet the criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List,
as defined for the purpose of implementing the Convention.
Historic Centre of 504 Colombia
Popayan
Gerona 519 Spain
Monastery of 520 "
Pere de Rodes
Canonical Church of 521 "
Sant Vicenç de Cardona
(Barcelona)
Ubeda and Baeza 522 "
Town of Taal 501 Philippines
Town of Vigan 502 "
*[9]
Historic Centre of 503 "
Intramuros de Manila
Navan Fort 490 Rev. United Kingdom
D. Nominations to the List of World Heritage in Danger
25. The Bureau was informed that an expert would proceed to
Wieliczka Salt Mines in July 1989 in order to obtain the necessary
information on the state of conservation of this property and on
the most urgent needs for its protection. In the light of the
results of this mission, which would be presented during the
thirteenth session of the Committee, the Bureau, and in turn the
Committee, could take a stand in December 1989 on the inscription
of this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
26. The Bureau considered that, if the Government of Mali so
wished, a preparatory assistance mission could be organized with a
view to helping the authorities concerned to work out an
appropriate nomination file on Timbuktu (mosques, cemeteries and
mausoleums) to the List of World Heritage in Danger. This
nomination file could be presented to one of the next sessions of
the Bureau.
X. NOMINATIONS OF NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
AND TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER
27. The Bureau examined five nominations, one of which
(Tasmanian Wilderness) consisted of an extension to an already
existing site and which was being processed as a new nomination in
accordance with paragraph 54 of the Operational Guidelines, another
of which (Tongariro National Park) had been previously deferred by
the Bureau at its eleventh session and which was being re-examined
at the request of the New Zealand authorities as they had submitted
a report in response to the Bureau's recommendations at that time.
28. The Bureau also examined a request to remove a natural site
from the List of World Heritage in Danger, which is presented in
Section C. below.
A. Nominations recommended for inscription
Name of Property Identification Contracting Criteria
No. State
having submitted
the nomination of
the property in
accordance with
the Convention
Tasmanian Wilderness 507 Australia N(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)
(Extension to the Western
Tasmanian National Parks
World Heritage site)
The Bureau noted with satisfaction the proposal to expand the existing World
Heritage site by adding an additional area of 261,960 ha, i.e. a 34% increase.
The Bureau concurred with the IUCN recommendation to further expand the
additional nominated area to include the Denison/Spires/Maxwell River area
comprising the Northern and Western portion of the "hole in the doughnut", plus
a number of areas along the Eastern boundary of the current extension and
welcomed the declaration of the representative of Australia that this additional
expansion would be submitted in September. Accordingly, the Bureau requested the
Australian authorities to submit the final boundaries of the proposed extension
to the Secretariat by 15 September 1989 to allow IUCN to complete its evaluation.
The Bureau further requested ICOMOS to evaluate the cultural values of the full
extended area. The completed IUCN evaluation and the ICOMOS evaluation on the
cultural values should be *[10] examined by the Bureau at the time of the
Committee session in December to give the Committee a clear recommendation.
Banc d'Arguin 506 Mauritania N(ii)(iv)
National Park
The Bureau recommended that the Committee inscribe this site on the World
Heritage List, excluding the Cap Blanc Satellite Reserve which could only be
considered once the boundary question is resolved and until the Côte des Phoques
parts can be included. The Bureau also recommended that the Mauritanian
authorities should adopt the recommendations of a FAO review of the protective
legislation of the Park, as well as expand its research efforts into cultural and
socio-economic aspects of local people (Imraguen) living in the Park.
Mosi-oa-Tunya/ 509 Zambia/Zimbabwe N(ii)(iii)
Victoria Falls
The Bureau recommended the inscription of this site and requested the States
Parties concerned to reduce the limits of the nominated property to include the
Victoria Falls National Park, the southern half of Mosi-oa-Tuaya National Park,
and a small portion of the riverine strip of Zambesi National Park in order to
better concentrate on the core features of the Falls area and the downstream
gorges.
B. Nominations to be deferred
Tongariro National Park 421 New Zealand
The Bureau recommended that the inscription of this property on the World
Heritage List be further deferred until the revised management plan is available
for review, particularly with regard to the following items:
a) the extent of ski development on Mt. Ruapehu, the current plans for
expansion and the impact of these developments on cultural values and
"image" of the park. This is compounded by new prospects for slope
grooming and snow making which would have substantial impacts on scenic
values and hydrology. It has been suggested that the ski fields of
Tongariro would be very susceptible to effects of global warming which
would require an upward movement of skiing activity;
b) the extent to which the cultural values of the Park are given prominence
in the new management plan and the level of involvement by the local Maori
people.
Wattenmeer 508 Fed. Rep. of Germany
(Mudflats of lower Saxony)
The Bureau recommended that the nomination of this site be deferred until a fully
documented nomination of the whole Wadden Sea complex is jointly submitted by
Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands. In this regard, the
Bureau noted that the Netherlands is not yet a State Party to the Convention and
requested the Secretariat to resume its contacts with the Dutch authorities to
encourage the adherence of the Netherlands to the Convention. The Bureau welcomed
the proposal that ICOMOS should help the countries concerned in drawing up the
joint nomination to take account of the archaeological and cultural values of the
Wadden Sea complex.
C. Proposal to remove a natural property from the List of World
Heritage in Danger
Ngorongoro Conservation Area
Tanzania
The Bureau was glad to learn of improvements in the management and
protection of this site, due in part to the support from the World
Heritage Fund, since it was inscribed on the List of World Heritage
in Danger in 1983. The Bureau noted that by letter dated 2 March
*[11]
1989, the Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Tourism had
agreed to remove this property from the List of World Heritage in
Danger and recommended that the Committee should comply with this
request.
XI. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES
29. The Bureau took note of the report on promotional activities
(SC-89/CONF.003/9) prepared by the Secretariat and was particularly
glad to learn of the number and variety of initiatives being taken,
both within the States Parties themselves and with the support of
the Secretariat. The representative of Australia commented on the
success of the Heritage Week in Australia on 16-23 April 1989 and
wished to thank Mr. B. von Droste, Secretary for the natural part
of the Convention, for having made such an active contribution. The
representative of India drew attention to the fact that India was
celebrating World Heritage Day (18 April) since 1988 and also has
started a World Heritage Week. The Bureau expressed its
satisfaction that many other new activities were planned in States
Parties.
XII. MEANS OF ENSURING AN EQUITABLE REPRESENTATION OF THE
DIFFERENT REGIONS AND CULTURES
30. The Bureau took note of documents SC-89/CONF.003/8 and
Addendum, prepared by the Secretariat on the subject. The members
of the Bureau were in favour of making money available from the
World Heritage Fund to finance, in whole or in part, the
participation of specialists in the preservation of the cultural or
natural heritage who were nationals of the least-developed
countries that were members of the Committee. Such grants would
give those countries an opportunity to participate regularly in the
Committee's work and could be assimilated to the funding of study
tours enabling specialists to attend technical meetings. The Bureau
considered that the procedures for such grants should be
established by the Committee at its next session.
31. The possibility of increasing the number of Member States on
the Committee to 36 (in order to re-establish a balance in the
representation of the different regions and cultural areas within
the Committee) was considered at length by the Bureau. One member
of the Bureau spoke against the idea, especially as it could not be
envisaged until the process of revising the Convention had been
concluded, making it impossible to solve the problem at the next
General Assembly. He suggested that the next elections should be
organized, as for many other governmental committees, on the basis
of quotas laid down according to the regions as defined at Unesco
with a view to the execution of regional activities. Three other
members of the Bureau endorsed that view. There being no consensus
on that solution, the Bureau was in favour of the Secretariat's
suggestion that the Committee should amend its Rules of Procedure
and insert in Rule 8 a paragraph introducing a new category of
observers (the conditions of whose participation it would lay
down), namely the outgoing States, for a period of four years.
Should the Committee so decide, such a solution would permit the
active participation, as from 1991, of 35 States Parties consisting
of the 21 Committee members and the 14 outgoing members, it being
understood that in 1989 - subject to a decision by the Committee at
its 13th session - participation would be of to 28 States Parties.
32. The Bureau expressed the wish that the forthcoming General
Assembly of States Parties to the Convention concerning the
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage would adopt,
on the basis of the text proposed by the Secretariat, a resolution
drawing the attention of States Parties to the importance of
ensuring an equitable rotation of Member States on the Committee
(some States having been members of it for 15 years and more) and
requesting the Committee to consider amending its Rules of
Procedure to permit participation in it by the new category of
observers.
*[12]
XIII. REPORT OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE TO THE GENERAL
CONFERENCE
33. The Bureau examined document SC-89/CONF.003/10 presenting the
draft report of the Committee to the 25th session of the Unesco
General Conference in October/November 1989. The Bureau requested
that this document be completed to reflect its discussions on
equitable representation, its decision concerning requests for
international assistance and to present up to date figures for the
contributions to the World Heritage Fund.
XIV. DATES AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE THIRTEENTH SESSION OF
THE COMMITTEE
34. The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its last session had
decided that its thirteenth session should be held at Unesco HQ on
4-8 December 1989. The Bureau noted that unfortunately there were
no conference facilities available at Unesco for that period and
agreed that the thirteenth session would take place the following
week on 11-15 December 1989.
35. In order to avoid such situations in the future, the Bureau
suggested that the sessions of the Bureau and the Committee take
place at the same dates each year so that the Secretariat could
reserve the conference rooms well in advance. The Bureau
recommended that the Committee hold its sessions during the first
week of December each year and that the Bureau take place in June
at a suitable date after the session of the Executive Board.
36. The Bureau examined document SC-89/CONF.003/11 proposing a
draft agenda for the thirteenth session of the Committee: it
proposed amendments to include an item on matters arising from the
General Assembly of States Parties, a review of the criteria for
cultural and natural heritage before the agenda item on
nominations, in accordance with the recommendations of the Working
Group, and also a report on the global study.
XV. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION
37. The Chairman thanked the members of the Bureau and all those
who had contributed to the success of the session. He then closed
the session.
SC/89/CONF.003/12
ANNEX I
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
Bureau of the World Heritage Committee
Thirteenth Session
(Unesco Headquarters, 27-30 June 1988)
PROVISIONAL LIST OF PARTICIPANTS /
LISTE PROVISOIRE DES PARTICIPANTS
I. STATES MEMBERS OF THE BUREAU / ETATS MEMBRES DU BUREAU
AUSTRALIA / AUSTRALIE
H. E. Mr Edward Gough WHITLAM
Member, Unesco Executive Board
Mr John L. LANDER
Alternate Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mr. D. GRAHAM
Counsel for the Australian Government
Mr Warren NICHOLLS
Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment,
Tourism and Territories
BRAZIL / BRESIL
M. Augusto Carlos DA SILVA TELLES Chairman / Président
Secrétaire du patrimoine historique
et artistique national
M. Luiz Felipe DE MACEDO SOARES
Ministre
Délegué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
M. Isaard Garcia DE FREITAS
Assesseur technique
Délégation permanente auprés de l'Unesco
*[ANNEX I/2]
CANADA
Mr James D. COLLINSON
Asst. Deputy Minister
Environment Canada
Mrs Christina CAMERON
Director-General
Environment Canada
FRANCE
M. François ENAUD
Inspecteur général honoraire
des monuments historiques
Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication
Mme. Muriel DE RAISSAC
Chargée de mission
Direction du Patrimoine
Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication
Mme. Anita DAVIDENKOFF
Chef du Bureau de l'Unesco
Ministère des Affaires étrangères
M. Marcel JOUVE
Chargé des relations internationales
Direction de la Protection de la Nature
Secrétariat d'Etat chargé de l'environnement
M. Jean-Pierre BOYER
Conseiller technique
Commission nationale française pour l'Unesco
Mlle. Françoise DESCARPENTRIES
Premier Secrétaire
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
GREECE / GRECE
Mme. Androniki MILTIADOU Rapporteur
Conseiller aux affaires de la culture
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
M. Isidore KAKOURIS
Sous-Directeur,
Direction des Monuments byzantins et post-byzantins
Ministère Hellénique de la Culture
INDIA / INDE
Mr Ramesh Chandra TRIPATHI
Joint Secretary
Indian Department of Culture
*[ANNEX I/3]
YEMEN ARAB REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE ARABE DU YEMEN
M. Mohamed ALKHAMRY
Ministre plénipotentiaire
Ambassade de la République arabe du Yémen
II. OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS
STATE PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION /
ETATS PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL
BULGARIA / BULGARIE
M. Tzanko BATCHAROV
Comité de la Culture de la Bulgarie
COLOMBIA / COLOMBIE
Mme. Cecilia ZAMBRANO
Premier secrétaire, Chargee d'affaires
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
HUNGARY / HONGRIE
M. Béla KOVACSI
Conseiller, Ministère de la Construction
Mr Zoltan BALOGH
Directeur général
Ministère de la Santé
TURKEY / TURQUIE
M. Engin TURKER,
Conseiller
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
USSR / URSS
Mme. Tarjana VASILIEVA
Senior Scientific Worker
USSR Academy of Sciences
USSR Committee for World Heritage
Mr. Yuri MARTIN
Estonian SSR Academy of Sciences
Chairman, Estonian MAB Committee
*[ANNEX I/4]
III. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY /
ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT AVEC UN STATUT CONSULTATIF
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS) /
CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES
M. Roberto DI STEFANO
Président
Mr Helmut STELZER
Secretary General
M. Léon PRESSOUYRE
Vice-Président
Université de Paris I
M. Hervé DEGAND
Documentaliste
INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL
RESOURCES (IUCN) /
UNION INTERNATIONAL POUR LA CONSERVATION DE LA NATURE ET DE SES
RESSOURCES (UICN)
Mr James THORSELL
Executive Officer
Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas
Mr P.H.C. LUCAS
Adviser
Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESERVATION AND THE
RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY (ICCROM) /
CENTRE INTERNATIONAL D'ETUDES POUR LA CONSERVATION ET LA
RESTAURATION DES BIENS CULTURELS (ICCROM)
Mr Jukka JOKILEHTO
Assistant to Director
*[ANNEX I/5]
IV. SECRETARIAT
Mr S. DUMITRESCU
Assistant Director-General
Science Sector
Mme. Anne RAIDL
Directeur
Division du patrimoine culturel
Mlle. Chantal RALAIMIHOATRA
Chef p.i., Section des Normes
internationales
Division du Patrimoine culturel
Mrs Jane ROBERTSON
Division of Ecological Sciences
Mr Natarajan ISHWARAN
Division of Ecological Science~
Mlle. Chantal LYARD
Section des Normes internationales
Division du Patrimoine culturel
Distribution: Limited ANNEX II
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
World Heritage Committee
Thirteenth Session
Unesco Headquarters, Paris, 11-15 December 1989
Salle XI
PROVISIONAL AGENDA
1. Opening of the session by the Representative of the Director-
General
2. Adoption of the Agenda
3. Election of the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and Rapporteur
4. Equitable representation of different regions and cultures of
the world: review of conclusions of the 7th General Assembly
5. Introduction on activities undertaken by the Secretariat since
the twelfth session of the Committee
6. Report of the Rapporteur for the thirteenth session of the
Bureau
7. Revision of nomination forms and forms for requesting
international assistance
8. Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage
properties and related technical problems
9. Promotional activities
10. Requests for international assistance
11. Situation of the World Heritage Fund and budget for 1990
12. Global study
13. Review of criteria for inscription of properties on the World
Heritage List
14. Nominations of cultural properties to the World Heritage List
and to the List of World Heritage in Danger
15. Nominations of natural properties to the World Heritage List
and to the List of World Heritage in Danger
16. Other business
17. Adoption of the report of the session
18. Closure of the session
*[EOF]