State of Conservation (SOC)
Kizhi Pogost (1994)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:9,000USD
|1992||Mission of 3 experts to define the state of conservation of the ...||9,000 USD|
Summer 1993: ICOMOS mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Legal framework;
- Management systems/ management plan;
- Financial resources;
- Lack of fire /lightning protection;
- Deformation and deterioration of the structures
Current conservation issues
[Oral report to the World Heritage Committee]
Analysis and Conclusion
Link to the decision
Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)
It was recalled that since 1991 ICOMOS had presented to the Committee and the Bureau reports on its involvement in the monitoring of this site and on the efforts to conserve and restore its monuments. ICOMOS reported that the legal protection of the monument and the buffer zone had been considerably improved and that a conservation professional had been assigned. The workplan for 1994 had been completed and included:
- the installation of a system of lightning protection as part of a major reworking of fire protection and security at the site;
- studies of wood deterioration conditions; measurement of deformations by hand and photogrammetric techniques;
- analysis of defects to the iconostasis.
- completion of the structural analysis is scheduled for the end of January 1995.
A short and a long-term budget and workplans had been established and ICOMOS involvement was foreseen for its implementation. In view of the financial constraints in the Russian Federation, ICOMOS recommended the following:
- high priority be given to undertaking with the Russian and other national authorities, a full discussion of feasible alternative strategies for continued support and activity in conjunction with the already planned March 1995 concept selection meeting;
- on-going monitoring activity be continued; and
- other funding sources be identified and coordinated with the approved conservation plan and priority site needs.
The Committee endorsed these recommendations and requested ICOMOS in consultation with the Secretariat to implement them.
No draft Decision
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2014 2013 2012 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2001 1994 1993 1992
Detailed List of SOC reports
Lack of fire /lightning protection; Deformation and deterioration of the structures
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”).