Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 1990
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger N/A
Previous Committee Decisions see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/544/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 9,000
For details, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/544/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Previous monitoring missions
Summer 1993: ICOMOS mission
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
Illustrative material see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/544/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1993
[Oral report by ICOMOS and the Secretariat]
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM
Decision Adopted: 17 BUR VIII.2
ICOMOS reported on its continuous involvement in the conservation efforts for this site. As a follow-up to the decision of the World Heritage Committee at its sixteenth session, to support the coordination effort undertaken by ICOMOS, a technical study programme has been set up for 1993, including a 5-6 week mission of 5 or 6 experts. These experts will be supported by their respective governments so tilt no professional fees will be paid from the Fund. The results of the mission will be presented by ICOMOS to the World Heritage Committee at its seventeenth session in December 1993.
The Bureau commended ICOMOS' approach in assistance to Kizhi Pogost, using its professional network and obtaining substantial contributions from the Governments of Canada, Norway and Finland.
Decision Adopted: 17 COM X
Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)
At the seventeenth session of the Bureau, ICOMOS informed about its involvement in the conservation efforts for Kizhi Pogost and that an expert mission would be undertaken to the site. The Bureau approved a technical assistance request to support this mission with funds provided under the Canadian Green Plan. The mission took place in summer 1993 and a full report was available. In collaboration with the Russian counterparts, the mission addressed issues such as legal protection, conservation management, fire protection, iconostasis conservation, documentation, and monitoring, history and authenticity, biological/chemical deterioration, structure and conservation philosophy and goals.
Based on the findings of the mission, ICOMOS recommended that in 1994 high priority be given to finding means to support the following study and decision-making activities:
A major conservation project at the site could then start in 1995.
The Committee commended ICOMOS for its excellent collaboration with the Russian authorities and experts and the collaboration provided by the Governments of Canada, Finland and Norway and the individual ICOMOS members who participated in the mission. The Committee endorsed the recommendations formulated by ICOMOS.