Cultural and Historic Ensemble of the Solovetsky Islands
Factors affecting the property in 2013*
- Legal framework
- Management activities
- Management systems/ management plan
- Other Threats:
Lack of monitoring
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Lack of joint management system;
- Lack of monitoring mechanisms;
- Lack of appropriate legal measures and rules for conservation, restoration, management and use of religious World Heritage properties.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2013
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2013**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2013
At its 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) sessions, the World Heritage Committee had requested the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre a report on the state of conservation of the property, as well as to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM reactive monitoring mission to the property to a) review the existing management system and decision-making mechanisms, b) assess the overall state of conservation of the property.
The State Party did not submit a state of conservation report as requested. Thus no information has been provided on the possible reconstruction of the monastery buildings and other major interventions in the landscape of the property for which the Committee requested information in 2011.During the last two years, the mission has continuously been postponed due to various reasons.
According to information available on the website of the Russian Orthodox Church, an agreement between the Ministry of Culture and the Russian Orthodox Church was signed on 3 May 2012, in order to establish cooperation in the sphere of culture and cultural heritage with a specific focus on the properties inscribed on the World Heritage List.
On 6 September 2012, the State Party informed the World Heritage Centre that a Committee on the conservation of the spiritual, cultural and natural heritage of the Solovetsky Archipelago was established within the framework of the “President’s working group on matters relating to the restoration of cultural heritage sites of religious significance and other religious buildings and artefacts”. The State Party also informed that within the framework of the Instruction by the President of the Russian Federation of 25 June 2012 “on measures to conserve and develop the Solovetsky Archipelago as a cultural and natural site”, the Ministry of Culture is working to develop and implement a range of mechanisms to safeguard and develop this site. An inspection visit to the site was carried out by the representatives of the Ministry of Culture.
Upon request of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the World Heritage Centre jointly developed with ICCROM and ICOMOS a concept note for a special training workshop for the religious representatives involved in the management and use of the World Heritage properties in the Russian Federation. The State Party proposed to organize this workshop, which had been requested by the World Heritage Committee since its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011) in May 2013.
The World Heritage Centre was informed by the UNESCO Moscow Office that draft amendments to the Federal Law on Cultural Heritage of the Russian Federation have been introduced by the Russian Government following the 36th session of the World Heritage Committee, as well as that a Round-Table on implementation of the World Heritage Convention in the Russian Federation has taken place on 21 March 2013 by the Cultural Committee of the Russian Duma in Moscow further to the request of the Committee to review the legal framework for the protection of World Heritage in the Russian Federation. The World Heritage Centre is in contact with the Russian authorities concerning further details on this issue.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2013
The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies take note of the State Party’s efforts to develop a range of mechanisms to safeguard and develop the property but note as well that no state of conservation report has been submitted regarding the majority of the World Heritage Committee’s requests. They draw attention to the fact that, as no reports have been received for the past two years, no information has been provided on the possible reconstruction of the monastery buildings and other major interventions in the landscape of the property for which information was first requested in 2011.
The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies therefore recommend that the Committee reiterate all requests included in the decisions taken at the 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) sessions of the Committee.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2013
37 COM 7B.82
Cultural and Historic Ensemble of the Solovetsky Islands (Russian Federation) (C 632)
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-13/37.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decisions 35 COM 7B.107 and 36 COM 7B.86 adopted at its 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) sessions respectively,
3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit a state of conservation report;
4. Takes note of the steps the State Party is making towards developing legal measures for the protection of World Heritage cultural properties, as well as for the establishment of a “Committee on the conservation of the spiritual, cultural and natural heritage of the Solovetsky Archipelago”;
5. Notes that the State Party decided to organise, further to the Committee’s request and in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre, ICCROM and ICOMOS, a training workshop for the religious representatives involved in the management and use of the World Heritage properties in the Russian Federation;
6. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre detailed information concerning the Master Plan of the Solovetsky Monastery and any other planning documents prior to the reactive monitoring mission;
7. Reiterates its concern about the possible reconstruction of the monastery buildings and other major interventions in the landscape of the property in terms of the impact on its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and also requests the State Party to provide detailed information to the World Heritage Centre prior to the mission;
8. Reiterates its request to the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre all project proposals that may threaten the OUV of the property, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines , as well as to submit alongside all new proposals Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs), in conformity with the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for World Heritage cultural properties;
9. Further reiterates its request to the State Party to invite, as a matter of urgency, a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM reactive monitoring mission to the property to assess the overall state of conservation of the property and recommends that the mission be scheduled as soon as possible;
10. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2014 , a report on the state of conservation of the property and on the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session in 2014.
Draft Decision: 37 COM 7B.82
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-13/37.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decisions 35 COM 7B.107 and 36 COM 7B.86 adopted at its 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) sessions respectively,
3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit a state of conservation report;
4. Takes note of the steps the State Party is making towards developing legal measures for the protection of World Heritage cultural properties, as well as for the establishment of a “Committee on the conservation of the spiritual, cultural and natural heritage of the Solovetsky Archipelago”;
5. Notes that the State Party decided to organise, further to the Committee’s request and in collaboration with the World Heritage Centre, ICCROM and ICOMOS, a training workshop for the religious representatives involved in the management and use of the World Heritage properties in the Russian Federation;
6. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre detailed information concerning the Master Plan of the Solovetsky Monastery and any other planning documents prior to the reactive monitoring mission;
7. Reiterates its concern about the possible reconstruction of the monastery buildings and other major interventions in the landscape of the property in terms of the impact on its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and also requests the State Party to provide detailed information to the World Heritage Centre prior to the mission;
8. Reiterates its request to the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre all project proposals that may threaten the OUV of the property, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, as well as to submit alongside all new proposals Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs), in conformity with the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for World Heritage cultural properties;
9. Further reiterates its request to the State Party to invite, as a matter of urgency, a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM reactive monitoring mission to the property to assess the overall state of conservation of the property and recommends that the mission be scheduled as soon as possible;
10. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2014, a report on the state of conservation of the property and on the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session in 2014.
Russian FederationExports
* :
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.
