jump to the content
Advanced search

State of Conservation (SOC)

Butrint (2004)

Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property

Requests Approved: 0 (from1996-1997)
Total Amount Ap proved: 106,000USD

1997   Butrint   100,000  USD
1996   Technical assistance for the restoration of Butrint   6,000  USD
Missions**
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

Lack of management mechanisms and tourism pressure; state of conservation of the property and implementation of the recommendations of the joint missions 

Corrective Measures
Current conservation issues

The inclusion of Butrint on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997 was motivated by the fact that the property had been faced with serious deterioration of materials resulting in an important loss of cultural significance.  Other factors were a lack of conservation policy, the threatening effects of regional planning projects and gradual changes to the monument due to environmental factors.

 

As requested by the Committee (27 COM 7A.26), a joint UNESCO-ICOMOS mission took place from 26 to 31 October 2003 to assess the current situation of the property in terms of legal protection, management arrangements and the state of conservation.  Its aim was also to evaluate the level of implementation of the recommendations of the UNESCO-ICOMOS mission to Butrint in April 2001. The situation has improved in the legislative and institutional fields, and that important steps had been taken to better protect the area against illegal constructions negative impacts of regional planning projects.  Strong commitment is being shown by the Albanian authorities to effectively protect the property. However, the mission concluded that effective implementation of these policies is inadequate, particularly because of the lack of an official management plan for the whole area and inefficient coordination between the different national and international stakeholders, which subsequently reduces the impact of funding.

 

The UNESCO-ICOMOS mission strongly recommended to the authorities the following:

 

a)     systematically continue the conservation works, also of architecturally less impressive archaeological sites, walls and buildings;

b)    pay special attention to the interpretation of the property, which has been considerably neglected from the point of view of its universal value;

c)     take appropriate measures for the effective protection of the property’s cultural landscape, including the development of hydrological studies and sustainable agricultural methods;

d)    establish the area between the National Park and the RAMSAR site borders as a buffer zone of the World Heritage property, including the villages bordering the National Park and

e)     establish an urban development policy for these villages. 

 

The mission further recommended preparing and adopting an integrated management plan in compliance with the existing legislation, which should specifically refer to ways of preserving the universal value of the property. The essentials of this management plan could be defined at a Round Table that would gather all the stakeholders (Butrint National Park Board members, international public and private organisations, local stakeholders and citizen’s organisations). Such a Round Table should benefit from technical assistance from UNESCO and its Advisory Bodies, who may also be invited to send specialists to Albania in order to moderate the event. Following the Round Table and the adoption of a site management plan, the tasks and staffing of the management authority and its relation to the Board of the National Park should be clearly defined. The Board should be enlarged to include representatives from Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Defence.

 

The decision-making capacity of the Board shouldbe improved by having a long-term strategy with clearly defined priorities, and by approving in its Annual Agreements the action plans for the implementation of the activities that are to be set out in the new management plan.  

Conclusion
Decision

  • Adopted

  • Draft Decision

28COM15A.28
Link to the decision

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Commends the State Party for the progress made with the legal protection and the institutional arrangements for the World Heritage property;

2. Acknowledges the results of the international UNESCO/ICOMOS mission to the property providing updated information;

3. Notes that the threats for which the property was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997 have been partially mitigated through the improvement of its legal and institutional protection;

4. Expresses its concern about the difficulties in effectively implementing the measures aiming at the better interpretation and conservation of the property, in particular due to the lack of an officially adopted management plan;

5. Urges the State Party to take into account the specific recommendations from the UNESCO/ICOMOS mission of 2003, in particular to finalize and adopt a management plan for the World Heritage property as soon as possible;

6. Recommends that the management plan for the World Heritage property should be co-ordinated with the management plan for the Ramsar Convention protection area;

7. Endorses the proposal for a Round Table, to be organised in co-operation with the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM, in order to include private and public stakeholders in the management planning, both at national as at international level;

8. Encourages the State Party to submit an international assistance request for the organisation of this Round Table;

9. Requests the State Party to provide an up-date report taking into account all the issues raised in the UNESCO-ICOMOS mission report of 2003, to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2005 for consideration y the World Heritage Committee at its 29th session in 2005;

10. Decides to retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

28COM15C.2
Link to the decision

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Following examination of state of conservation reports of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-04/28.COM/15A Rev),

2. Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

  • Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.21)
  • Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.22)
  • Butrint, Albania (Decision 28 COM 15A.28)
  • Tipasa, Algeria (Decision 28 COM 15A.16)
  • Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower, Azerbaijan (Decision 28 COM 15A.29)
  • Royal Palaces of Abomey, Benin (Decision 28 COM 15A.14)
  • Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park, Central African Republic (Decision 28 COM 15A.1)
  • Comoé National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (Decision 28 COM 15A.2 )
  • Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve, Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea (Decision 28 COM 15A.5)
  • Okapi Wildlife Reserve, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Kahuzi-Biega National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Virunga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Garamba National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Salonga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Sangay National Park, Ecuador (Decision 28 COM 15A.12)
  • Abu Mena, Egypt (Decision 28 COM 15A.17)
  • Simien National Park, Ethiopia
  • (Decision 28 COM 15A.4)
  • Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras (Decision 28 COM 15A.13)
  • Group of Monuments at Hampi, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.24)
  • Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.10)
  • Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat), Iraq (Decision 28 COM 15A.18)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls, Jerusalem (Decision 28 COM 15A.31)
  • Timbuktu, Mali (Decision 28 COM 15A. 15)
  • Kathmandu Valley, Nepal (Decision 28 COM 15A.25)
  • Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves, Niger (Decision 28 COM 15A.6)
  • Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore, Pakistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.26)
  • Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone, Peru (Decision 28 COM 15A.30)
  • Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras, Philippines (Decision 28 COM 15A.27)
  • Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary, Senegal (Decision 28 COM 15A.7 )
  • Ichkeul National Park, Tunisia (Decision 28 COM 15A.9)
  • Everglades National Park, United States of America (Decision 28 COM 15A.11)
  • Historic Town of Zabid, Yemen (Decision 28 COM 15A.20)

 

Draft Decision: 28 COM 15A.28

 The World Heritage Committee,

 1.     Commends the State Party for the progress made with the legal protection and the institutional arrangements for the World Heritage property;

 2.     Acknowledges the results of the international UNESCO/ICOMOS mission to the property providing updated information;

 3.     Notes that the threats for which the property was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997 have been partially mitigated through the improvement of its legal and institutional protection;

 4.     Expresses its concern about the difficulties in effectively implementing the measures aiming at the better interpretation and conservation of the property, in particular due to the lack of an officially adopted management plan; 

 5.     Urges the State Party to take into account the specific recommendations from the UNESCO/ICOMOS mission of 2003, in particular to prepare and adopt a management plan for the World Heritage property as soon as possible;

 6.     Endorses the proposal for a Round Table, to be organised in co-operation with the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM, in order to include private and public stakeholders in the management planning, both at national as at international level;

 7.     Encourages the State Party to submit an international assistance request for the organisation of this Round Table;

 8.     Requests the State Party to provide an up-date report taking into account all the issues raised in the UNESCO-ICOMOS mission report of 2003, to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2005 for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 29th session in 2005;

 9.     Decides to retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

 

Butrint
State Party:
Albania
Date of Inscription: 1992
Nomination records (Year): 2007, 1990, 1999
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)
Danger List: Yes
Exports
Word File
SOC Reports (year)
2009
2007
2006
2005
2004
Threats*
  • Housing
  • Interpretative and visitation facilities
  • Illegal activities
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:
    a) Lack of adequate protection and conservation of the site; b) Serious deterioration of materials resulting in an important loss of cultural significance
Documents
WHC-04/28.COM/15A.Rev
Other Documents:
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC ID: 1389
Inscription on the Danger List
Year: 1997 -2005
Threats to the Site:

The civil disturbances in the country in early 1997 did not cause any irreversible damage to the archaeological site itself, but the showcases of the museum were opened and looted. No inventory of the stolen objects has yet been made, but fortunately the site's most famous treasure, the marble head of the 2nd-century BC “Goddess of Butrint” had been moved to Tirana before the event.

The Committee's concern over the continued lack of adequate protection, management, and conservation of the site led to its inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997 with the full support of the Minister of Culture of Albania who voiced his government's concern and commitment to the preservation of the site.

A joint mission to Butrint in October 1997 had noted that the site remains vulnerable for a number of reasons, including the lack of proper fencing. Two water pumps used to preserve the ancient theatre from infiltration had been stolen earlier that year and had to be replaced. Computers and other equipment were also needed to prepare an inventory, and other urgent needs had to be met.

The Committee allocated an amount of US$100,000 as emergency assistance in December 1997.


* : 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.