PDF version: Report of the Committee(1.6Mb)

Distribution limited

WHC-98/CONF.203/18 Paris, 29 January 1999 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-second session

Kyoto, Japan

30 November – 5 December 1998

 

 

REPORT

 

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

		Page
I.	Opening Session	1
II.	Adoption of the Agenda and Timetable	2
III.	Election of the Chairperson, Rapporteur and Vice-Chairpersons	2
IV.	Report of the Secretariat on activities undertaken since the twenty-first session of the World Heritage Committee	2
V.	Report of the Rapporteur on the sessions of the World Heritage Bureau	3
VI.	Methodology and Procedures for Periodic Reporting	4
VII.	State of Conservation of Properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger and on the World Heritage List	6
VIII.	Information on Tentative Lists and Examination of Nominations of Cultural and Natural Properties to the List of World Heritage in Danger and the World Heritage List	24
IX.	Follow-up to the Work of the Consultative Body of the World Heritage Committee	32
X.	Progress Report, Synthesis and Action Plan on the Global Strategy for a Representative and Credible World Heritage List	36
XI.	Examination of the World Heritage Fund and Approval of the Budget for 1999, and Presentation of a Provisional Budget for 2000	39
XII.	Requests for International Assistance	43
XIII.	World Heritage Documentation, Information and Educational Activities	54
XIV.	Revision of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention	56
XV.	Date, Place and Provisional Agenda of the twenty-third session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee	57
XVI.	Date and Place of the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee	57
XVII.	Other Business	57
XVIII.	Closure of the session	58

ANNEX I	List of Participants	59
ANNEX II	Speeches
II.1	Speech by the Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO	76
II.2	Message of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, delivered by the Japanese Ambassador to Osaka	78
II.3	Speech by the Parliamentary Vice-Minister of Education	79
II.4	Speech by the Governor of the Prefecture of Kyoto	80
II.5	Message of the Mayor of the City of Kyoto	81
II.6	Speech by the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee	82
II.7	Speech by the Representative of The World Bank	83
II.8	Speech by the Resident Representative to Japan of the Asian Development Bank	85
ANNEX III	Format and Explanatory Notes for the submission of Periodic Reports	87
ANNEX IV	Decision of the twenty-second extraordinary session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (Kyoto, 28-29 November 1998) with regard to the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List	95
ANNEX V	Statement of Thailand relating to the Thung Yai-Huay Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries	115
ANNEX VI	Kakadu National Park, Australia
VI.1	Presentation by Prof. F. Francioni (Italy) concerning the World Heritage Mission to Kakadu National Park (Australia), 26 October-1 November 1998)	116
VI.2	Joint IUCN-ICOMOS Position Statement	120
VI.3	First Statement by the Delegate of Australia	121
VI.4	Second Statement by the Delegate of Australia	121

 

ANNEX VII.1	Statement of Poland relating to the inscription of Classical Weimar (Germany)	122
VII.2	Statement by Poland relating to the inscription of L'viv (Ukraine)	122
ANNEX VIII	Statement by Greece on authenticity	123
ANNEX IX	Statement by the former Chairperson relating to a Technical Assistance request for Turkey and Annex A of Document WHC-98/CONF.203/14Rev.	124
ANNEX X	Provisional Agenda of the twenty-third session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee	126

ANNEX XI	Statements by Hungary
XI.1	Invitation to hold a session of the World Heritage Committee	128
XI.2	Remarks on GIS-related Information to Document WHC-98/CONF.203/15	128
XI.3	Proposal for Establishing a World Heritage Fellowship Programme	129
ANNEX XII	Guidelines and Principles for the Use of the World Heritage Emblem	130

*[1]

 

I. OPENING SESSION

I.1 The twenty-second ordinary session of the World Heritage Committee was held in Kyoto, Japan, from 30 November to 5 December 1998. It was attended by the following members of the World Heritage Committee: Australia, Benin, Brazil, Canada, Cuba, Ecuador, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Niger, Republic of Korea, Thailand, United States of America and Zimbabwe.

I.2 The following States Parties to the Convention who are not members of the Committee were represented as observers: Austria, Belgium, Cameroon, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Egypt, Estonia, Fiji, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Holy See, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lithuania, Nepal, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

I.3 Representatives of the advisory bodies to the Convention, the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of the Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and The World Conservation Union (IUCN) attended. The meeting was also attended by The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA), the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), Organization of World Heritage Cities (OWHC), The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Asia/Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO, Environment Diplomacy Institute, Friends of the Earth, Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, National Federation of UNESCO Associations in Japan (NFUAJ), Natural Resources Defense Council, The Nature Conservation Society of Japan (NACS-J), Pro Esteros (Mexico), The Wilderness Society Inc. and the World Monuments Fund. The complete list of participants is given in Annex I.

I.4 The outgoing Chairperson of the Committee, Mr Francesco Francioni (Italy), opened the twenty-second session by thanking the Government of Japan, as well as the Prefecture and the City of Kyoto for generously hosting the Committee. In summarizing the activities of the Committee during the past year under his Chairmanship, Mr. Francioni remarked on the growing challenge of World Heritage protection. To enhance the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, he indicated the importance he attached to improving the working relations between the statutory bodies of the Convention and the UNESCO Secretariat. In this connection, he thanked the members of the Consultative Body appointed by the Committee and the members of the Bureau who worked diligently in addressing the four issues identified by the Committee for review, and for their work in the formulation of recommendations.

I.5 In recalling the highlights of his work in his capacity as the Chairperson, special mention was made of the mission he was entrusted by the Bureau to undertake to Kakadu National Park in Australia. Citing this case as an example of the complexity of World Heritage protection, he stated that the authority of the Convention and its effectiveness depend on the Committee's capacity to address the difficult issues inherent in such cases. He concluded by thanking the Committee for the confidence entrusted to him and for their support.

I.6 Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage of the Culture Sector of UNESCO, in his capacity as Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO, expressed the gratitude of UNESCO to the Government of Japan and to the local authorities and citizens of Kyoto for hosting this Committee session. In delivering the speech on behalf of the Director-General (provided in Annex II.1), Mr Bouchenaki referred to the important intellectual and financial contribution made by Japan in advancing reflection on world heritage as well as in the tangible work of heritage conservation in many countries. He thanked, in particular, the generosity of the Government of Japan for the Funds-in-Trust contribution to UNESCO for cultural heritage preservation projects. He stated that the strong support being given by the public and private sectors in Japan for world heritage education and public information is another indication of the long-term commitment and vision of Japan for the World Heritage Convention. To meet the challenges of the multifarious threats to World Heritage, Mr Bouchenaki indicated the importance the Director-General has attached to strengthening the World Heritage Centre since its establishment in 1992 as a transdisciplinary, inter-sectoral co-ordinating entity within UNESCO. In this regard, he transmitted the Director-General's deep appreciation for the hard work and leadership provided by Mr Bernd von Droste, Director of the World Heritage Centre, during his 25 years of service at UNESCO for the cause of natural and cultural heritage conservation. Special mention was made of Mr von Droste's important contribution in developing the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Programme, then in building UNESCO's capacity for the protection, conservation and presentation of World Heritage through widening and strengthening partnerships in the collective international effort. In concluding his statement, Mr Bouchenaki expressed on behalf of his colleagues, his hope for Mr von Droste's continued involvement in world heritage protection even after his retirement from UNESCO.

I.7 The Chairperson then invited the representatives of the host Government to deliver their welcoming remarks.

I.8 The message of His Excellency Mr Masahiko KOUMURA, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, was delivered by Mr Hiromi SATO, Ambassador in Osaka. In his message (attached as Annex II.2), the Minister of Foreign Affairs stressed the strong support the Government and people of Japan have provided to the activities of UNESCO. International cultural exchange, notably through support for cultural heritage preservation via UNESCO and other multilateral channels, as well as through bilateral co-operation programmes has become an important aspect of Japan's foreign policy. International co-operation as foreseen within the framework of the World Heritage Convention, is therefore considered to be of particular importance to Japan.

I.9 Mr Kensaku MORITA, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Education, stressed in his speech (Annex II.3) the vital role of cultural heritage as a foundation of national identity. The understanding and respect for the heritage of all nations is therefore of great importance in fostering international peace. It is for this reason, he stated, that Japan supports the World Heritage Convention and educational activities to raise the awareness of both adults and children for the conservation of world heritage sites. Moreover, through the organization of expert meetings such as the Nara Conference on Authenticity, held in 1994, Japan has also tried to contribute to deepening the international understanding of cultural diversity and the concepts of authenticity that are linked to this diversity.

I.10 Mr Teiichi ARAMAKI, Governor of Kyoto Prefecture, welcomed the Committee. Stating that cultural and natural heritage are increasingly threatened by industrial development, he said that the work of the World Heritage Committee is vital to enable future generations to benefit from the spiritual inspiration that heritage has provided to past generations (speech attached as Annex II.4). In noting the need for considerable financial resources and technological knowledge to counter these threats, the Governor called for greater international co-operation *[2] between governments and also between local authorities throughout the world, as well as with non-governmental organizations.

I.11 Mr Yorikane MASUMOTO, Mayor of the City of Kyoto, welcomed the Committee to Kyoto on behalf of the city's 1,460,000 citizens. In his speech (attached as Annex II.5) he stressed the important role which all citizens have in protecting the heritage of the past and in passing it intact to future generations. Kyoto's commitment to its role as guardian of the 14 historic monuments included in the World Heritage List is shown by the fact that a special "Kyoto Committee for Support of the 22^nd Session of the World Heritage Committee " has been formed to assist and support its work. Mayor Masumoto observed that in an era of increasing globalization, the preservation of the spiritual values enshrined in the heritage is of increasing importance to develop inter-cultural understanding and tolerance. His goal is that Kyoto, which represents the soul of Japan, should be preserved as a meeting place for all the peoples and cultures of the world

II. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE

II.1 Upon the conclusion of the opening remarks, the Chairperson requested the Committee to adopt the Provisional Agenda and Timetable. At the request of the Delegate of Canada, the Committee agreed to include two additional matters under Item 9: the Green Note of the Director-General concerning the organization of the World Heritage Centre, and the workload of the Committee. It was agreed that the increasing number of nominations and state of conservation reports the Committee is expected to evaluate each year requires a review of its working method. The Agenda and Timetable as amended were adopted.

III. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON, RAPPORTEUR AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS

III.1 As proposed by the Delegate of Thailand, and endorsed by the Republic of Korea, Morocco, Zimbabwe, Benin, Canada, France, Australia, United States of America, Italy, Ecuador and Finland, Mr Koichiro MATSUURA (Japan) was elected as Chairperson by acclamation. The following members of the Committee were elected as Vice-Chairpersons by acclamation: Benin, Cuba, Italy, Morocco, and Republic of Korea, and Mr Janos Jelen (Hungary) as Rapporteur. It was mentioned that Cuba, Republic of Korea and Hungary would be members of the Bureau for the first time.

III.2 The Committee warmly thanked the out-going Chairperson, Mr Francesco Francioni for the excellent leadership he provided the Committee during the past year which had resulted in closer working relations between the Committee and the Secretariat. The newly-elected Chairperson, Mr Koichiro Matsuura, expressed his appreciation for the remarkable manner in which Mr Francioni carried out his functions as Chairperson of the Committee.

III.3 In assuming the Chair of the Committee, Mr Matsuura stated that the process of globalization occurring in almost all domains, has made the preservation of cultural diversity even more important. The fostering of understanding and respect for all cultures, each for its specificity, is essential and is part of the fundamental mission of UNESCO to promote mutual understanding and co-operation between all countries in the building of peace. In this regard, the World Heritage Convention, since its adoption a quarter of a century ago, has played a vital role. He identified three main issues that he felt required the continued attention of the Committee: the question of geographical imbalance, the concepts of authenticity and integrity taking into consideration the different cultures, and lastly, the relationship with UNESCO. He concluded by indicating the importance of the venue of this session of the Committee, as the City of Kyoto, established more than 1200 years ago and designed to be in harmony with its natural surroundings has always placed culture as the goal of its development. Requesting the support of all present at this session to enable him to fulfill the important tasks before him, Mr Matsuura reiterated his firm commitment to the ideals of the World Heritage Convention. (His speech is included as Annex II.6 to this report).

IV. REPORT OF THE SECRETARIAT ON ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE TWENTY-FIRST SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

IV.1 Mr Bernd von Droste, Director of the World Heritage Centre, reported in his capacity as Secretary of the Committee on the activities undertaken by the Secretariat since the twenty-first session of the World Heritage Committee. He referred to Information Document WHC-98/CONF.203/INF.5 and made an audiovisual presentation. In this presentation he highlighted the salient activities of the Secretariat.

IV.2 The Director of the Centre stated that with the adhesion of Togo, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Grenada and Botswana, the number of States Parties has increased to 156. In spite of the growing universality of the Convention, a significant number of UNESCO Members States have yet to sign the Convention, notably twelve from Sub-Saharan Africa, three from the Arab States, ten from the Asia-Pacific, two from Europe and four from the Latin America and the Caribbean.

IV.3 In terms of nominations, the Director indicated that an analysis of new nominations and tentative lists demonstrates that the problem of regional imbalance will aggravate if the present trend continues. Of the 35 nominations to be reviewed by the Committee at this session, there is not a single property in Africa and only one site in the Arab States. In fact, the vast majority is from Europe. For 1999, there are 89 new nominations, breaking all records of the past. This poses a very serious problem, testing the capacities of ICOMOS and IUCN, as well as the Secretariat, Bureau and the Committee in giving each case the attention it merits. This points to the necessity of rationalizing the working methods.

IV.4 Efforts to rectify the imbalances and to make the World Heritage List more representative, the Director mentioned, were being made through several regional expert meetings. Particular reference was made of the Global Strategy expert meeting held in Amsterdam in March 1998 to review the criteria and the conditions of authenticity and integrity, the details of which are provided in Documents WHC-98/CONF.203/12 and in WHC-98/CONF.203/INF.7 and INF.9.

IV.5 The attention of the Committee was drawn to Africa 2009, a programme organized jointly by the Centre, ICCROM and CRATerre-EAG. This programme is a regional training strategy for sub-Saharan Africa developed by the three organizations to build capacity for conservation of immovable cultural heritage in the region. This type of capacity building and training is considered to be essential to encourage greater participation of the region in World Heritage matters.

IV.6 The Director also referred to the Intergovernmental Consultation Conference on the Draft European Landscape Convention, held in Florence in April 1998, as a regional effort in *[3] collaboration with the Council of Europe, to identify and protect the landscapes of Europe.

IV.7 Stressing the importance of ensuring the World Heritage sites in a satisfactory state of conservation, the Director referred to the decision of the 29^th General Conference of UNESCO regarding the periodic reporting on World Heritage sites by the States Parties and also to the reactive monitoring reports which are being submitted to the Committee in increasing numbers. While the twenty-first session of the Committee examined 74 state of conservation reports in 1997, there are reports on 98 sites put before this session of the Committee.

IV.8 To enhance the capacities of the statutory bodies, the advisory bodies and the Secretariat, the question of information management was addressed in March 1998 at an expert group meeting held at UNESCO Headquarters which resulted in a number of recommendations provided in Document WHC-98/CONF.203/15.

IV.9 The Director then referred to the growing threats to World Heritage, notably by citing the emergency cases brought to the attention of the Secretariat caused by natural and man-made disasters. The serious threats to Kakadu National Park in Australia from the uranium mining proposal and the evaluation mission led by the outgoing Chairperson was mentioned in particular. The hurricanes in the Caribbean, the disaster at Doñana National Park in Spain, civil unrest in Butrinti, Albania, as well as the problem caused by uncontrolled development in the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal and Islamic Cairo, Egypt, were also among the cases cited.

IV.10 The growing problem of cultural heritage conservation in urban areas was mentioned by the Director in the context of the International Conference for the Mayors of Historic Cities in China and the European Union held in Suzhou, China in April 1998. He referred to the potential of international co-operation between local authorities as demonstrated in this Conference and in projects between other countries in Asia and Europe (Document WHC-98/CONF.203/INF.12).

IV.11 Turning to the need to widen partnerships between stakeholders, he stated the importance of enhancing the role of local communities in World Heritage management, and informed the Committee of the regional meeting held at Hua Kha Khoung in Thailand in January 1998 to promote this aspect. The report is being published.

IV.12 As a means to broaden partnerships, he mentioned the external evaluation conducted on the activities of the Nordic World Heritage Office (NWHO) and commended its work in expanding international co-operation (Document WHC-98/CONF.203/INF.14). He also requested the Delegate of Canada who participated in the evaluation exercise to inform about the results. She confirmed the recommendation that the mandate of the NWHO be extended for another three years, at which time a more substantive evaluation could and should be undertaken.

IV.13 In reporting on the implementation of the international assistance provided from the World Heritage Fund, he recalled the importance attached by the Committee to the use of the World Heritage Fund in a catalytic manner to generate local, national and international support for the conservation of World Heritage sites. In this regard, the Director stressed that public information work was an essential part of the World Heritage conservation process to raise the awareness and support for world heritage among opinion leaders and the public at large. He referred to the wide range of information activities being undertaken by the Secretariat, citing in particular the television documentary series and production of publications in partnership with media groups in many countries. He noted that the Centre's World Heritage web site which was redesigned this year to facilitate navigation and linkage to the World Heritage Information Network (WHIN) partners, is now receiving some 30,000 hits per week, or over one million per year.

IV.14 As part of the Secretariat's report, the Committee was informed that a second international World Heritage Youth Forum had been held in Osaka, Japan, from 22 to 29 November 1998, hosted by the Osaka Junior Chamber, Inc. and co-organized by UNESCO. Two students and one teacher from sixteen countries: Australia, Austria, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Croatia, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Japan, Lebanon, Malawi, Norway, Romania, Senegal and Zimbabwe, participated. The participants, selected with the assistance of the UNESCO National Commissions of the respective countries, produced two pledges, one by the students, "Patrimonito's Pledge" and the other by the teachers, adopted by the Second International World Heritage Youth Forum. The student pledge was read to the Committee by one of the students, Mr Rangarirai Mlamba of Zimbabwe, on behalf of all the students.

IV.15 The Chairperson informed the Committee that the World Heritage Education Kit, prepared by the World Heritage Centre in co-operation with UNESCO's Education Sector has been finalized with financial support from the Rhône Poulenc Foundation and NORAD. The Kit entitled "World Heritage in Young Hands", prepared in English and French in a total of 4,000 copies, will be distributed to UNESCO Associated Schools in all regions of the world on an experimental basis. After its final evaluation and modification if necessary, the final version will also be translated into other languages.

IV.16 The Chairperson handed a copy of the Kit to the representatives of the Youth Forum. He thanked the Director of the Centre and remarked on the impressive range of activities undertaken by the World Heritage Centre.

V. REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR ON THE SESSIONS OF THE WORLD HERITAGE BUREAU

V.1 The Rapporteur of the twenty-second regular (June 1998) and twenty-second extraordinary (November 1998) sessions, Mr Noel Fatal, presented the reports contained in Working Documents WHC-98/CONF.203/4 and WHC-98/CONF.203/5. He informed the Bureau that a letter from the Tunisian authorities was received requesting that the word "reservoir" be replaced by "dam" in the text concerning Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia). The Delegate of Thailand indicated that in the report of the twenty-second session of the Bureau (page 19) under the section on the state of conservation of the Historic Areas of Istanbul, the sense of his intervention is not fully reported. He asked that the following sentence be added: "However, the undertaking of the EU-funded feasibility study under discussion is legitimate, if, as pointed out by the Secretariat, the project covers the buffer zone of the World Heritage site."

V.2 The Rapporteur then thanked the Bureau members and the Secretariat for their collaboration and stated the need for reflection on the format of the Bureau reports in view of the increasing volume and complexity of the content.

V.3 Before proceeding to Item 6, the Chairperson informed the Committee of the presence of the representatives of the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank as observers at a Committee session for the first time. Expressing his appreciation for the interest of these agencies in the World Heritage Convention, he indicated the necessity of integrating *[4] conservation in the sustainable development process, as stipulated in Article 5 of the Convention. The Chairperson drew the attention of the Committee to Information Document WHC-98/CONF.203/INF.12, Report on Activities for World Heritage Cities in Asia, which discusses the important issue of heritage conservation and development.

GUEST SPEAKERS

The Chairperson invited Mr. Ismail Serageldin, Vice-President for Special Programmes of The World Bank, to address the Committee. Mr. Serageldin brought greetings from Mr. James D. Wolfenson, President of the World Bank, and underscored the Bank's commitment to partner all those concerned with the preservation of cultural heritage within the context of sustainable development. In his speech, Mr. Serageldin outlined three areas in which the Bank will systematize its support to culture: (1) conceptual; (2) technical and financial support for the protection of the cultural heritage; and (3) partnerships with other international organizations, the private sector and civil society. He welcomed the delegates to an exhibition by The World Bank on the theme of "Heritage at Risk" which is being held at the Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto. Mr. Serageldin said that The World Bank is willing to finance operations in support of conserving the World Heritage sites, provided that these are imbedded in a broader developmental endeavour. He stressed the importance of community and stakeholder involvement and a participatory approach in all efforts to integrate conservation and development. His speech is attached as Annex II.7.

The Chairperson then invited Mr. Nalin P. Samarasinghe, Resident Representative in Japan of the Asian Development Bank to take the floor. In his speech, Mr. Samarasinghe provided information about the Asian Development Bank. He also examined the Asian Development Bank's strategic objectives relating them to the objectives of the World Heritage Committee. Giving examples of what the Asian Development Bank has done to promote World Heritage conservation, he stressed the Bank's recognition of the need to preserve cultural and natural heritage sites as common resources of the world. The Asian Development Bank supports projects that aim to generate employment opportunities and income from heritage resources without destroying them in the process; projects such as forestry and fisheries management, and eco-tourism. He also said the Asian Development Bank shared the Committee's view of the importance of World Heritage education. He explained the Asian Development Bank's policy regarding the importance of undertaking environmental impact assessments as a part of the planning of all projects which the Asian Development Bank considers for funding. He underscored that these assessments take into consideration the effect of the proposed projects on World Heritage sites as well as on their indigenous inhabitants. Specific examples of heritage conservation projects which the Asian Development Bank has funded include environmental rehabilitation in Agra (Taj Mahal), airport development in Siem Reap (Angkor), and sustainable tourism in Nepal. His speech is attached as Annex II.8.

VI. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES FOR PERIODIC REPORTING

VI.1 The Secretariat introduced Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6. It pointed out that this document referred to the periodic reporting by the States Parties under Article 29 of the World Heritage Convention and did not include considerations on the reactive monitoring that is foreseen for reporting on World Heritage properties that are under threat. It informed the Committee that this document had been discussed by the Bureau at its twenty-second session. Reference was also made to Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/16 that included the corresponding revision of Section II of the Operational Guidelines.

VI.2 During the debate, numerous Committee members commended the Secretariat for the work accomplished and expressed general agreement with the proposals made.

VI.3 Committee members expressed strong support for the regional approach and the development of regional strategies for the periodic reporting process, as proposed in the Working Document, as a means to respond to the specific characteristics of the regions and to promote regional collaboration.

VI.4 As to the periodicity of the reporting, the Committee agreed to a six-year cycle. It decided that in the first reporting cycle those properties should be reported upon that were inscribed up to eight years before the examination of the reports by the Committee.

VI.5 The Committee, furthermore, stressed the important role the States Parties themselves, as well as the advisory bodies and other organizations should play in the periodic reporting process, in the development of the regional strategies and in the review of the reports submitted by the States Parties.

VI.6 Several delegates referred to the future workload for the Secretariat, the advisory bodies and the Committee and requested that this be carefully considered in the planning of the work of the Centre and the advisory bodies, as well as in the management of the agenda of the Committee.

VI.7 The Committee, having examined Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6 and the corresponding Section of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/16, adopted the following decision:

A. Following the request made by the 29^th General Conference of UNESCO, the World Heritage Committee:

1. Invites States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to submit, in accordance with Article 29 of the World Heritage Convention and the decisions of the Eleventh General Assembly of States Parties and the 29^th General Conference of UNESCO, periodic reports on the legislative and administrative provisions and other actions which they have taken for the application of the World Heritage Convention, including the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties located on its territories;

2. Invites States Parties to submit periodic reports every six years using the format for periodic reports as adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its twenty-second session;

3. Expresses its wish to examine the States Parties' periodic reports region by region. This will include the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List according to the following table:

*[5]

 

Region	Examination of Properties inscribed up to and including	Year of examination by Committee
Arab States Africa Asia and the Pacific Latin America and the Caribbean Europe and North America	1992 1993 1994 1995 1996/1997	2000 2001 2002 2003 2004/2005

 

1. Requests the Secretariat, jointly with the advisory bodies, and making use of States Parties, competent institutions and expertise available within the region, to develop regional strategies for the periodic reporting process as per the above-mentioned time table, and to present them with budgetary proposals for their implementation to the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee for consideration and adoption. These strategies should respond to specific characteristics of the regions and should promote coordination and synchronization between States Parties, particularly in the case of transboundary properties.

   B. As to the format for the periodic reports, the Committee adopted the   proposal made in Annex I of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6, with the following revisions:

Section II.1. to read as follows :

"II.1 Introduction

1. State Party
2. Name of World Heritage property
3. Geographical co-ordinates
4. Date of inscription on the World Heritage Liste.
5. Organization(s) or entity(ies) responsible for the preparation of the report
6. Date of report
7. Signature on behalf of State Party"

 

Section II, item II.3. to read as follows :

"II.3. Statement of authenticity/integrity"

Section II, item II.7. to read as follows :

"II.7. Conclusions and recommended action

1. Main conclusions regarding the state of the World Heritage values of the property (see items II.2. and II.3. above)
2. Main conclusions regarding the management and factors affecting the property (see Items II.4 and II.5. above)
3. Proposed future actions
4. Responsible implementing agency/agencies
5. Timeframe for implementation
6. Needs for international assistance."

C. As to the explanatory notes that will be attached to the format for periodic reports, the Committee adopted the proposals made in Annex I of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6, with the following revisions:

II.2. Statement of Significance, paragraph four to be read as follows:

"If a statement of significance is not available or incomplete, it will be necessary, in the first periodic report, for the State Party to propose such a statement. The statement of significance should reflect the criterion (criteria) on the basis of which the Committee inscribed the property on the World Heritage List. It should also address questions such as: What does the property represent, what makes the property outstanding, what are the specific values that distinguish the property, what is the relationship of the site with its setting, etc. Such statement of significance will be examined by the advisory body(ies) concerned and transmitted to the World Heritage Committee for approval, if appropriate ."

II.4. Management, paragraphs one and two to be read as follows:

"Under this item, it is necessary to report on the implementation and effectiveness of protective legislation at the national, provincial or municipal level and/or contractual or traditional protection as well as of management and/or planning control for the property concerned, as well as on actions that are foreseen for the future, to preserve the values described in the statement of significance under item II.2.

The State Party should also report on significant changes in the ownership, legal status and/or contractual or traditional protective measures, management arrangements and management plans as compared to the situation at the time of inscription or the previous periodic report. In such case, the State Party is requested to attach to the periodic report all relevant documentation, in particular legal texts, management plans and/or (annual) work plans for the management and maintenance of the property. Full name and address of the agency or person directly responsible for the property should also be provided."

D. The Committee adopted the revision of Section II of the Operational Guidelines as submitted in Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/16, including the amendments made above.

VI.8 The format for periodic reports and explanatory notes as adopted by the World Heritage Committee is attached in Annex III.

*[6]

VII. 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

VII.1 The Committee examined reports on the state of conservation of twenty-two properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger as submitted in Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/7 and complemented with information provided by the Secretariat and the advisory bodies during the session.

NATURAL HERITAGE

VII.2 Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria)

At its nineteenth session (Berlin, 1995) the Committee had requested the Bulgarian authorities to submit a threat mitigation status report to its twenty-second session in 1998. The Bulgarian authorities submitted the report requested by the Committee on Srebarna Nature Reserve, on 28 August 1998, and invited the Centre and IUCN to field a mission to verify the results of measures undertaken to mitigate threats to the integrity of Srebarna. A team consisting of one specialist each from IUCN and the Ramsar Convention Secretariat, and a consultant representing the Centre, visited Srebarna and Sofia, Bulgaria, from 1 to 6 October 1998.

The Committee reviewed a summary of the report submitted by the mission team, which included: (i) a brief description of Srebarna's World Heritage values; (ii) causes which led to the decline in Srebarna's ecology and state of conservation and its inclusion in the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992; (iii) principal findings concerning the results of rehabilitation measures implemented by the Bulgarian authorities; and (iv) proposals for recommendations to be made by the Committee to the State Party.

The Committee recalled that Srebarna Nature Reserve was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1983. This 602 ha. fresh water site on the flood plain of the Danube River was acknowledged to be of regional and global significance under criterion (iv) of the 1983 Operational Guidelines; i.e. geological and physiographic formations and precisely outlined areas which are habitats of species threatened by extinction, and of plant or animal species with extraordinary and universal value from the point of view of science, nature protection or natural beauty. The site was of particular significance as a nesting site for the Dalmatian pelican, ferruginous duck, the pygmy cormorant and corncrake.

Srebarna was disconnected from the Danube in 1949 by the construction of a dike between the lake and the river. Engineering efforts in 1979 to mitigate the impacts of the dike construction were not successful. Between 1985 and 1990, the adverse impacts of a protracted drought in the Balkan peninsula, and the cumulative impacts of historical and recent anthropogenic influences became more readily observable in the deteriorating ecological conditions of Srebarna. The latter causal agents and the regulation of annual Danube flood crests by the Romanian Iron Gates control structure led to decreasing inundation of Srebarna by the Danube waters. The introduction of modern agricultural practices (chemical fertilizers and insecticides) and the increase in domestic animal populations in the surrounding arable drainage area also led to net adverse results. These results include increased levels of dissolved nitrogen and phosphate, and sedimentation and turbidity, decreased water column and lake volume, increased primary productivity and significant changes in the structure of phytoplankton populations. An acceleration of eutrophication and the transition of Srebarna from a lake to a marsh, the decline of biodiversity (particularly fish species), the diminished use of the area by rare and threatened resident and migratory bird species, and reduced nesting success ratios of key breeding bird species of World Heritage significance was also noted. At its sixteenth session in 1992, the Committee included Srebarna Nature Reserve in the List of World Heritage in Danger; in 1993, Srebarna was placed on the Montreux Record, a register of sites in need of priority conservation action in the implementation of the Ramsar Convention.

In 1995, the Committee examined a state of conservation report from the State Party which indicated that a canal, linking the Danube and Srebarna for the first time since 1949, had been successfully established with bilateral assistance from the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and was operational with control structures. A permanent Reserve Administration had been established and intensive monitoring studies were ongoing. In 1996, the Committee examined a monitoring report prepared by the Ramsar Secretariat indicating that the new canal and water control structure were operational allowing water into Srebarna Lake. It also indicated that the Dalmatian pelican nesting colony had been re-established at levels higher than that found at the time of Srebarna's inscription on the World Heritage List in 1983. In 1997, a 35,000SF allocation from the Ramsar Small Grants Fund (1997), enabled the initiation of the preparation of a management plan for Srebarna. 

The Committee was pleased to learn that the team that undertook the mission from 1 to 6 October 1998 had been able to observe continuing improvements in the state of conservation of Srebarna. The team concluded that significant affirmative actions and investments have been made by the Bulgarian authorities to investigate, analyse and mitigate threats to Srebarna's World Heritage values. In particular, the mission team noted the following positive results:

A.  The re-establishment of an operational, seasonal connection between the Danube and the Srebarna Lake and surrounding wetlands has resulted in an increase in the water volume and water column, dilution and/or reduction of dissolved nitrogen and phosphate levels and lowered turbidity; phytoplankton populations have been re-established and their structure stabilised and fish species diversity had increased to pre-inscription (1983) levels;

B. The 1998 breeding success ratio of the nesting colony of Dalmatian pelicans significantly exceeded 1980s average population levels; 80 breeding pairs produced 99 successfully fledged chicks, registering a marked improvement over success ratios recorded for any period since Srebarna's recognition as World Heritage. The sixty breeding pairs of pygmy cormorant also reflect a similar significant key species response to more favourable ecological conditions now present. Other globally significant and rare water bird species including the corncrake and ferruginous duck, have also responded in a positive manner.

C. Administratively, significant legislation (Draft Protected Areas Act - No. 802-01-16) has been promulgated by the Ministry of Environment and Waters (MoEW), approved by the Council of Ministers, and is under a second review in the National Assembly. The intent of this legislation is to strengthen conservation in Bulgaria in general and harmonize Bulgarian protected area classification with international standards, including relevant European Union Directives. Elements of the draft legislation have a particular relevance to the continuing

*[7]

recognition of Srebarna, as a "strict" nature reserve where activities other than scientific research are excluded.

D. A small but competent staff has been established for the Srebarna Nature Reserve management and is currently co-operating well with the Academy of Science on ongoing monitoring activities; an automated weather recording facility is in place and will facilitate monitoring activities. Both management staff and Academy researchers appear on excellent terms with local community leadership that would be necessary to establish effective co-operation for the management of the buffer zone. Although the necessary integrated management planning process has been initiated, the final draft of the plan may still be 18 months away and does not appear to adequately involve public participation, or to address ethno-historical and socio-economic considerations. The plan outline may not necessarily translate into an action plan in its current form.

In the light of the significant improvements in the state of conservation of Srebarna, the Committee:

1. Commended the State Party for the efforts undertaken to restore Srebarna's environment and World Heritage values to 1983 standards;

2. Encouraged the State Party to accelerate the interdisciplinary management planning and threat mitigation efforts and continue to pursue intensive monitoring to assure continued ecological restoration so that the area may be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger when it can be demonstrated that recovery appears sustainable;

3. Encouraged the State Party to seek the necessary co-operation with Romania to assure that the feeding areas and flyways for the Srebarna breeding Dalmatian pelican population are offered safe haven, and based on the terms of the World Heritage Convention (Article  6.3), to establish a more favourable hydraulic regime of the Danube River;

4. Encouraged the State Party to actively participate in regional and international scientific, and management exchanges to further benefit the management of all the Danube River wetland resources;

5. Encouraged the State Party to explore the ways and means to collaborate with other States Parties sharing resident and migratory bird species and populations to collectively consider a composite transboundary "Danube Wetland World Heritage Site", to link and embrace all suitable and qualified areas which collectively represent a globally significant and outstanding natural and cultural resource.

The Committee will consider removing Srebarna from the List of World Heritage in Danger upon the passage of the pending Draft Protected Areas Act (No. 802-01-16) or substantively similar conservation legislation, the satisfactory and timely completion of the Srebarna Management Plan together with the establishment of effective resource and buffer zone management regimes compatible with restoring and maintaining World Heritage values, and the provision of data to support indices of sustained World Heritage value recovery through  to the year 2000. To this effect the Committee suggested that the State Party:

1. involve the local community and NGO representation in the management planning process and in the formulation of  specific co-operative  actions which may be required  in the management of the buffer zone and the adjacent Lake Srebarna drainage area;
2. consider acquiring additional  scientific data and information including ethno-historical and palaeo-botanical analysis of lake sediments prior to dredging activity, and to complete aerial-photographic  records for management planning;
3. develop a Srebarna Action Plan establishing management and environmental education, interpretation priorities and requirements to supplement the Srebarna Management  Plan as outlined; and
4. continue to participate in the implementation of activities that mutually support the objectives of the World Heritage Convention, Ramsar Convention, and the Man and the Biosphere Progamme (MAB).

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

The Committee, at its last session (Naples, 1997), was seriously concerned about the uncontrolled poaching by armed groups which had led to the death of four members of the Park staff, decimated more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations and brought tourism to a halt. The Committee had welcomed the efforts of the Government of CAR to assign site management responsibilities to a private Foundation and had requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the State Party and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the site. The Committee noted that the State Party had not responded to the Centre's letter outlining the Committee's recommendations mentioned above.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger and requested the Director-General of UNESCO and the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee to write to the President of the CAR inviting his urgent intervention for the preparation of a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the conservation of this site.

VII.4 World Heritage sites of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC):

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

The Committee had declared these four sites as World Heritage in Danger, during 1994-1997, as war and civil strife have ravaged the country. The Committee noted that the Bureau, at its twenty-second ordinary session (June 1998), had been of the view that the security situation in the country may be improving. Hence, the Bureau had encouraged the Centre to continue its efforts, in co-operation with international conservation NGOs, to ensure the purchase and safe delivery of one four-wheel drive vehicle to each of the four sites, in accordance with the decision of the Committee made at its last session (Naples, 1997).

Since June 1998 however, the law and order situation in the country has unfortunately deteriorated once again, and renewed fighting has spread to all parts of the country. A strategic planning workshop for the conservation and management of Garamba National Park, which was to be held in Kinshasa in August 1998 under the auspices of WWF had to be indefinitely postponed. Frequency of rhino sightings in Garamba have dropped and numbers of several large herbivores remain below their 1995 population levels. In the Okapi Faunal Reserve, equipment donated by international conservation NGOs has been looted and staff who were in the process of reviving conservation activities evacuated. In Kahuzi Biega, WWF Project staff was withdrawn due to worsening security conditions in the area and the Tshibanga Station has been looted. In Virunga human encroachment has been detected along Lake Edouard. Park guards no longer carry any weapons, and require military escort to patrol the Park and have not been paid their salaries for nearly two years. "Motivation .allowances" paid to guards in the

*[8]

southern sector of Virunga by the International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP) had been stopped as the donor, i.e. UNHCR, withdrew its support to the scheme. IGCP and the national conservation authority, Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation (ICCN) have prepared a strategic action plan and are seeking funds for Park personnel. IGCP has agreed to distribute any financial support received to all sectors of the Virunga National Park. IUCN suggested that the Committee consider providing emergency assistance to pay some allowances to the staff at Virunga.

The Committee noted with concern that the vehicles purchased for Garamba and Kahuzi Biega National Parks could not be transported beyond Nairobi, Kenya, due to lack of security. The Committee requested the Centre to co-operate with WWF, UNDP and the Kenyan Government authorities to ensure the safety of these two vehicles so that they could be delivered to Garamba and Kahuzi-Biega whenever the situation in the eastern parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo returned to normal. IUCN informed the Committee that the territories in which the four sites are located are controlled by rebel forces and that it is unlikely that missions to any one of the four sites will be feasible in the near future.

The Committee decided to retain all four sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee requested the Centre to freeze all activities related to the purchase and delivery of vehicles to any one of the four sites until such time as security conditions improve. The Committee asked the Centre and IUCN to consult with IGCP and ICCN, to estimate the cost of paying allowances to staff at Virunga National Park as an interim measure and submit a proposal for emergency assistance for the consideration of the twenty-third session of the Bureau in 1999. Furthermore, the Committee suggested that the Centre and IUCN communicate the Committee's concerns for the state of conservation of these four sites to international and national NGOs working in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. These NGOs should be encouraged to disseminate information about the Committee's concerns among the general public as well as specific target groups such as the military.

VII.5 Sangay National Park (Ecuador)

The Committee, at its last session was informed that colonization and small-scale mining activities had been stopped, a new management plan was nearing finalization and that several conservation projects funded by WWF had begun. The Committee had urged the Centre, in collaboration with IUCN, and agreement with the State Party and possible support from WWF, to plan and organize a site visit to address the problem of the Guamote-Macas road construction project and other threats to the integrity of the site. The Committee was informed that the Bureau, at its twenty-second session in June 1998, had noted that the on-going construction of the Guamote-Macos road was the main threat to this Park and an EIA had not been conducted. Construction has been slow but very destructive to the environment. Only a small section of the road is inside the World Heritage site; the remainder of the road forms the Park's southern limit. The Committee noted that since the conclusion of the last session of the Bureau in June 1998, economic constraints have led to a halt in the activities related to the construction of the Guamote-Macos road. IUCN has noted that a 5-year, US$ 1.6 million project, financed by the Government of the Netherlands and jointly implemented by WWF and Fundacion Natura, will strengthen protection of the Park.

The Committee was informed that the Ecuadorean authorities have submitted to the Centre several new documents, including the "Strategic Management Plan for the Sangay National Park" immediately before the beginning of the Committee's twenty-second session. The Delegate of Ecuador informed the Committee that his Government has not issued any permits for oil exploration in Sangay and would welcome a Centre/IUCN mission to the site in 1999. The Committee noted with satisfaction the view of IUCN that conditions for strengthening the conservation of this site were improving and that it is possible that the planned mission in 1999 may recommend its removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee decided to retain this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger and thanked the Delegate of Ecuador for inviting a Centre/IUCN mission in 1999 to review the state of conservation of Sangay National Park. The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party and with other partners such as WWF to field such a mission as soon as possible in 1999 with a view to submitting an up-to-date state of conservation report to the twenty-third session of the Committee.

VII.6 Simen National Park (Ethiopia)

The Committee recalled the fact that the regional authorities in Bahir Dar, where this site is located, had disagreed with its decision to include this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1996. The Committee was informed that the Bureau, at its twenty-second session (June 1998) had noted with satisfaction the efforts of the Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Ethiopia and the UNESCO Office in Addis Ababa, to provide more information to the Bahir Dar authorities on the meaning and implications of the Committee's decision to include Simen National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The Committee took note of the fact that a stakeholders' meeting had been convened in Gondar on 24-25 June 1998, and that the responsibilities for the management of the Park had been transferred from the Central Authorities to the region. The meeting had led to the formation of a 'dialogue-group' of various national and regional offices to discuss follow-up activities for the conservation of the Park. The meeting had called for the organization of a second stakeholders' seminar, before June 1999, in collaboration with UNDP, Austria, UNESCO, UNCDF, Bahir Dar Regional Heads and donors, to follow-up on the outcome of the first meeting held in June 1998. The objectives of the second stakeholders' meeting would be to establish a strategy for:

1. minimizing the human population inside the Park, estimated at 8-10,000 people at present;

2. rehabilitation of the Park and re-establishing populations of selected species, like the Walia Ibex which have moved out of the Park due to human presence and the cultivation of considerable areas of the Park;

3. creation of an alternative to a road which currently goes through the Park; and

4. establishment of a framework for co-ordination, including the possible setting up of an Inter-Agency Committee where donor participation will be invited, for the sustainable development of the Simen Mountains ecosystem.

The Committee recalled the fact that it had approved a sum of US$ 30,000 in 1996 for the organization of a stakeholders' meeting for the conservation of Simen which had not been utilized because the Regional authorities in Bahir Dar had disagreed with the Committee's decision to include the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger at that time. The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to consult with the Ethiopian authorities regarding the use of the US$ 30,000 from the 1999 budget of the World Heritage Fund, either for the organization of the second stakeholders' meeting or for other strategic planning activities pertaining to the conservation and management of this

*[9]