jump to the content

State of Conservation (SOC)

Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (2005)

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property

Requests Approved: 0 (from1980-1993)
Total Amount Ap proved: 76,800USD

1993 Financial contribution for the services of 2 architects/engineers ...   14,000  USD
1992 Financial contribution for the monitoring of 5 cultural sites: ...   3,300  USD
1986 Assist the authorities in preparing a request of assistance for ...   6,500  USD
1980 Equipment and expert mission for the fortifications on the ...   53,000  USD
Missions**

Monitoring mission in 2001

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

Deterioration and destruction of the fabric by environmental factors, mainly water erosion; Absence of management policies; Uncontrolled urban development and tourism pressures (in particular Portobelo).

Corrective Measures
Current conservation issues

On 26 March 2005, the World Heritage Centre received information from the State Party, supplemented by information received from the World Monuments Fund (WMF) on 11 April 2005, concerning the study Proyecto Piloto de Panama, sponsored and executed by WMF and recently submitted to the Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INAC) Panama.  The project encompasses three phases:

First phase (executed): analysis of the threats affecting Portobelo and San Lorenzo and identification of its causes.  The study concluded that the main factor threatening San Lorenzo’s Fort is the lack of a proper water drainage system, while in Portobelo the main threats derive from seawater erosion and urban pressure.

Second phase (executed): on the basis of the study carried out in phase 1, a new water drainage system was put in place in San Lorenzo.

Third phase (in progress): concentrates conservation efforts in the Portobelo complex.  This phase has three main components, being 1) restoration, consolidation and renewal of the water drainage system in Portobelo’s Fortress; 2) needs assessment of the Fortaleza de Santiago; 3) proposal for the rehabilitation of the central urban area of Portobelo.

From the reports it can be established that the issues regardinguncontrolled urban development and tourism pressures reflect the absence of comprehensive Management Planning for the World Heritage property.  Several plans have been developed that apparently have not been implemented, or only partially.  The causes of this failure can be attributed to a lack of: feasibility of the plans proposed; integrated approach among stakeholders; articulation with territorial and municipal development plans; precise limits and buffer zones of the properties (the 2002 Reactive Monitoring mission underlined the need to define precise limits and buffer zones that take into account not only all existing historic remains and subsurface deposits, but also the visual integrity that reflects the strategic placement of architecture within the landscape).

ICOMOS praises the progress in the conservation works carried out in Portobelo and San Lorenzo, but at the same time stresses the need for a precise assessment of the significance of the whole World Heritage property, which should ultimately lead to a comprehensive long-term action plan with a prioritized course of action for research, prevention, conservation, monitoring, maintenance and presentation.  Furthermore, ICOMOS underlines that the proposals for future interventions should consider possible impacts on the values, and integrity and authenticity of the properties.  It further adds that, as the fortifications are subjected to several on-going conservation and restoration activities, initiated by different entities, it is necessary to coordinate efforts in order to avoid duplication.

Finally, regarding the increase of tourism pressures, the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS consider that although increasedvisitation could provide for economic benefits, it also requires more extensive archaeological and conservation work, putting in place comprehensive protection measures, and, most importantly, proper presentation and interpretation of what is to be visited.  These measures are critical for the understanding and valorisation of San Lorenzo and Portobelo, not only with regard to the significance of its cultural heritage, but also of its natural heritage.

Conclusion
Decision
  • Adopted

  • Draft Decision

29COM7B.94
Link to the decision

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev,

2. Recalling its Decision 28 COM 15B.118 adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),

3. Taking note of the information transmitted by the State Party of Panama on the progress in the restoration project "Proyecto Piloto de Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo",

4. Reiterates its invitation to the State Party to submit a request for international assistance of the World Heritage Fund to support in particular the development of management policies for the World Heritage property;

5. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2007 a progress report for examination by the Committee at its 31st session (2007).

Draft Decision: 29 COM 7B.94

The World Heritage Committee,

1.              Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev,

2.              Recalling its Decision28 COM 15B.118 adopted at its 28th session(Suzhou, China 2004),

3.              Taking note of the information transmitted by the State Party on the progress in the restoration project Proyecto Piloto de Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo,

4.              Reiterates its invitation to the State Party to submit a request for International Assistance to support in particular the development of management policies for the World Heritage property;

5.              Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre a progress report by 1 February 2007 for examination by the Committee at its 31st session in 2007.

Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo
State Party:
Panama
Date of Inscription: 1980
Nomination records (Year): 1979
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iv)
SOC Reports
SOC Reports by year
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2005
2004
1993
Detailed List of SOC reports
Threats*
Erosion and siltation/ deposition
Housing
Impacts of tourism/visitor/recreation
Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats:
Deterioration and destruction of the fabric by environmental factors
Inscription on the Danger List
Year: 2012
Threats to the Site:

Efforts continue to be inadequate to address the poor and fragile state of conservation of the property.

Despite the budget increase, the implementation of measures to address the conservation of the built fabric, urban expansion, encroachment and reforestation have remained in the planning stages for over ten years.

The Emergency Plan has only been partially developed and no precise indication on the expected timeframe for implementation has been provided.

There are still critical needs in terms of staffing and resources, as well as capacities to systematically implement conservation, management and protection actions for the property.



* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.