State of Conservation (SOC)
Iguazu National Park
Iguaçu National Park (1992)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:0USD
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Administration of the falls (Argentina); Sound pollution (helicopters)
Current conservation issues
[Oral report by IUCN and the Secretariat]
Link to the decision
VIII.12 The Committee decided to register the report and the map provided by the Canadian authorities as a description of the revised boundaries of the Dinosaur Provincial Park (Canada). The Committee expressed satisfaction on the progress in the implementation of the rehabilitation project in the Simien National Park (Ethiopia) for which the Committee approved US$50,000 at its last session. In the case of Iguazu National Park (Argentina), Iguazu National Park (Brazil) and Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada), the Committee requested the Centre to submit progress on their state of conservaiton to the Bureau scheduled to meet in mid-1993 at UNESCO Headquarters, Paris.
No draft Decision
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2012 2012 2010 2010 2008 2008 2007 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1992 1991 1986
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 1999 -2001
Threats to the Site:
The Committee noted that an IUCN/UNESCO mission was carried out to this site in March 1999 and dealt with four issues relevant to the integrity of this World
- The Colon road,
- Helicopter flights,
- Dams on the Iguaçu River,
- Management planning.
The Committee recognized the efforts made by the State Party to implement the recommendations of the mission. However, in the absence of satisfactory progress with regard to the permanent closure of the road and the implementation of the recovery plan, the Committee decided to include Iguacu National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
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”).