Decision 19 COM XV.1-2

Examination of the World Heritage Fund, and Approval of the Budget for 1996 and Presentation of a Provisional Budget for 1997

XV.1 The Committee approved the report of the Working Group on the World Heritage Fund, and after considerable discussion the 1996 budget was established at US$ 3,000,000. Suggested revisions to the budget format and financial statement were noted and the Centre was requested to continue its efforts to develop more transparency in the presentations. The Committee decided to replenish the Emergency Reserve Fund to US$ 500,000 at 1 January 1996 and 1 January 1997. The Committee, at its closing session, took note of an indicative budget for Chapters 11 to V for 1997 amounting to US$2,520,000.

XV.2 On more specific items, the Committee decided the following:

a) The Committee agreed, that depending upon the balance remaining in the Emergency Reserve Fund at the end of the fiscal year, the amount required to replenish this Fund to US$ 500,000 at the beginning of the year be transferred from the Operating Reserve. Upon evaluating the actual emergency actions in 1996, the Committee noted that this ceiling of the Emergency Reserve for 1997 would be increased if needed.

b) For Chapter I of the budget, "Overall functioning of the World Heritage Convention", the Committee agreed to increase the appropriation for attendance of experts of developing countries to the statutory meetings to US$ 80,000 to ensure the participation of two experts (one cultural and one natural) from states Parties requiring financial support and that in the future, this appropriation will be fixed on the basis of actual costs depending on the composition of the Committee and the Bureau, and the lieu of the statutory meetings.

c) "The Committee reiterated that the resources of the World Heritage Fund should be used solely for the purposes for which they were intended, such as international assistance, and not for financial support for personnel or functioning of the Secretariat. Nevertheless, it did approve an amount of US$ 360,000 as an exceptional measure, to cover the costs of seven full-time secretarial posts and the remaining balance could partially finance a documentalist. Concerning the Secretariat's request for the continued funding of the P-5 post for a natural heritage specialist, the Committee refused to meet this request. Recalling that it was the responsibility of UNESCO to provide the personnel of the Secretariat in accordance with Article 14 of the Convention, the Committee requested the Chairperson to take this matter up with the Director-General of UNESCO on their behalf. The Committee stressed that the staff of the Centre are to enjoy the same status as any other member of the UNESCO Secretariat. It was noted, furthermore, that the resources of the World Heritage Fund should be used for the stated purposes, such as for international assistance and not to finance the administrative support cost of the Secretariat.

d) The Director of the Centre pledged. to scrupulously respect the directives of the Committee to use these funds for seven temporary General Service posts in accordance with the terms of the UNESCO Staff Rules and Regulations and that he would provide a detailed report on' the real costs and the actual use of these funds. One delegate requested that the Director also report on the standards or ratios of secretaries to professional officers practiced at UNESCO.

e) The budgetary appropriation under Chapter II, "Establishment of the World Heritage List" was approved as proposed, up to US$ 592,000.

f) For Chapter III, the Committee noted that the International Assistance budget should continue to respect the decision taken at its session in Phuket with regard to the approval of requests, that is, to allocate at least one-third for natural heritage (US$ 228,333) and two-thirds for cultural heritage (US$ 456,667) for technical cooperation; and equal division between the two types of properties for training, up to US$ 550,000.

g) Following the adoption of the report of the Working Group on Monitoring, the Committee agreed to a new title for systematic monitoring under Chapter IV of the budget proposal, "Support to States Parties for Monitoring and Reporting". In order to reflect the decisions on this matter in the budgetary appropriations, the proposed Meeting of Experts on Monitoring and the activity on Methodological Development were not approved. However, to provide support to states Parties wishing to carry out the monitoring and reporting activities on voluntary basis, the Committee approved the budget for the proposed regional activities. Consequently, the budget was decreased to US$ 260,000.

h) In the debate on Chapter V on Budget, the Delegate of Lebanon proposed the creation, under "Promotion and Education", which would be increased by US$ 20,000, a budget sub-line for the extension to Africa and the Arab states of the Niger expertise in electronic communication, in order to create an electronic network of World Heritage sites and focal points in these two regions. The Committee decided therefore that out of the total of US$ 298,000, US$ 50,000 should be attributed to this project.

i) Noting the relative failure in fund-raising efforts, which resulted in the collection of very limited funds, the Committee stressed the need for the Director of the Centre to concentrate efforts to obtain the payment of the considerable arrears in states Parties' contributions and to report on the results to the twentieth session of the World Heritage Committee.

j) After considerable discussion with respect to the necessary coordination between the use of the World Heritage Fund and the budget of the UNESCO Regular Programme, it was agreed that the Centre would provide information to the Bureau at its next session on World Heritage activities undertaken by other sectors and units of UNESCO which are financed under the Regular Programme budget and by extrabudgetary contributions and that information be provided on the use of the Regular Programme.

k) The Committee congratulated Norway for its financial and moral commitment to world heritage. Some members of the Committee expressed strong concern about the creation of a network of World Heritage offices and invited the Director of the Centre to provide information on the creation of this type of office in Norway. The Chairperson, with the agreement of the Committee, invited the Observer of Norway to provide clarifications.

The Observer stated that the Office was established as a three-year pilot project on the basis of an agreement between the Government of the Kingdom of Norway and the Director-General of UNESCO. This office will be funded primarily by Norway with the support of other Nordic countries. The modest contribution from the UNESCO Regular Programme is to be used for joint operational projects to be undertaken by this Office and the World Heritage Centre. It was further noted that the Office was staffed by three Norwegian Public Service officers. Finally it was stated that the project would be re-evaluated in two-and-a-half years.

At the conclusion of the discussions a copy of the agreement was made available to the members of the Committee; but they did not have the opportunity to express their views on this text. The Director of the World Heritage Centre agreed to prepare a report for the next session of the Bureau on the subject of decentralization as it relates to World Heritage.

SYNOPTIC OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET

<sub>1. US$ 20,000 shifted from Chapter IV (Monitoring) to Chapter II (Advisory services)
2. US$ 22,000 shifted from Chapter V (Basic support for Information System) to Chapter II (Advisory services)</sub>