State of Conservation (SOC)
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (1995)
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
Total Amount Ap proved:295,382USD
|1995||Establishment of an administrative centre for Mount Nimba||18,000 USD|
|1993||Equipment and experts service for Mount Nimba||45,000 USD|
|1993||Consultancies and other services necessary for setting up a ...||30,000 USD|
|1992||Organization of an interdisciplinary mission to ascertain ...||35,000 USD|
|1992||Organization of a technical meeting for authorities of Côte ...||19,500 USD|
|1989||Purchase of an all terrain vehicle for Mount Nimba||20,000 USD|
|1988||Consultancy mission and meeting for preparing technical ...||15,000 USD|
|1986||Equipment for Mount Nimba Reserve||6,500 USD|
|1983||Financial contribution to a seminar/workshop on the elaboration ...||22,000 USD|
|1983||Consultant services to prepare requests for technical cooperation ...||6,082 USD|
|1982||Financial contribution to a tripartite meeting (Guinea, Ivory ...||8,000 USD|
|1981||Equipment for Mount Nimba||70,300 USD|
November 1988; June-July 1992: UNESCO field visit; May 1993: joint UNESCO/UNDP/IUCN mission; 1994: 2nd expert mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Lack of Management Plan;
- Lack of funding;
- New railway;
- Proposed reduction of the protected area;
- Refugees from Liberia
Current conservation issues
The Bureau recalled at its nineteenth session that the site was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992 because of negative impacts from a proposed iron-ore mining project and threats due to the arrival of a large number of refugees from neighbouring countries. An expert mission was undertaken in 1993 and proposals to revise the boundaries of the site were endorsed by the seventeenth session of the Committee in 1993. An international assistance project under the World Heritage Fund was recently carried out in 1994, and a report was presented to the eighteenth session of the World Heritage Committee. The French Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry for Cooperation, in cooperation with IUCN-France, have carried out a study and review of the site for the Government of Guinea with regard to priority needs and potential future investment.
The results of a 1994 mission to the site by the French IUCN Committee were presented to the Bureau, stating the lack of commitment by the Government of Guinea, and the fact that the site, for which responsibility is shared by four ministries, is legally not sufficiently protected or classified as a protected area on the national level.
The Bureau recalled that the boundaries were revised by the national authorities, and adopted by the seventeenth session of the World Heritage Committee. The Bureau requested the Centre, jointly with IUCN, to follow-up on the results of the mission, including a letter to the Guinean authorities to ask for clarifications on the legal protection and classification of the site. In their letter of 15 September 1995 the Ministry for Energy and Environment indicates that the Government had taken several measures to develop and protect the site. This included the creation of a Management Centre "Centre de Gestion de l'Environnement des Monts Nimba (CEGEN)" responsible for all environmental and legal questions, as well as the international classification of the site, the monitoring of the water quality in the region, integrated rural development and socio-economic studies; CEGEN and the ITC (Institut de Topographic et de Cartographic de Guinee) are cooperating on thematic maps and the preparation of a Mount Nimba Foundation to obtain bi/multilateral financial resources.
The Bureau may wish to commend the States Party for their efforts. However, given the uncertainties concerning the adequate managment of the site, and the shortcomings with regard to the on-site management, the Bureau may also wish to recommend to the Committee to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Link to the decision
IX.1 The Bureau examined documents WHC-95/CONF.201/7 and WHC-95/CONF.201/7Add and noted that, in accordance with the decisions at the eighteenth session of the World Heritage Committee, one third of the funds should be for natural heritage.Therefore, only requests for technical cooperation for natural heritage were brought forward to the Bureau. The Bureau, taking note of the amount of the remaining funds for international assistance, took the following decisions:
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)
Technical assistance for this site inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger for refurbishing, maintenance of the Headquarters buildings and for the reinforcement of the administrative structure-for an amount of US$ 18,000 was approved.
Rwenzori Mountains National Park (Uganda)
The technical assistance request for radio equipment, ranger field equipment and rescue gear for Rwenzori Mountains National Park for an amount of US$ 20,000 was approved.
Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Zaire)
The technical cooperation request for a 4-WD Toyota Land Cruiser Station Wagon for better surveillance and control of the National Park was approved (an amount of US$ 30,000), subject to the payment of outstanding dues to the World Heritage Fund.
Link to the decision
VII.6 Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Guinea/Cote d' Ivoire)
The Committee recalled that the site was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992 because of negative impacts from a proposed iron-ore mining project and threats due to the arrival of a large number of refugees from neighbouring countries. It furthermore recalled that an extensive report was presented to the Bureau at its nineteenth session in July 1995.
The Committee noted that in response to the Bureau's request for clarifications on the legal protection and classification of the site, the Ministry for Energy and Environment, by letter of 15 September 1995, indicated that the Government had taken several measures to develop and protect the site. This included the creation of a Management centre, "Centre de Gestion de l'Environnement des Monts Nimba (CEGEN)", responsible for all environmental and legal questions, as well as the international classification of the site, the monitoring of the water quality in the region and integrated rural development and socio-economic studies.
The Committee commended the States Parties for their efforts. Given the uncertainties and the shortcomings in on-site management, the Committee decided to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The Bureau recommends the Committee to take note of the written information provided by the Secretariat and to adopt the following:
"The Committee commended the State Party for its efforts. However, given the uncertainties and the shortcomings in on-site management, the Committee decided to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger."
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1987 1986 1984
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 1992
Threats to the Site:
The Reserve was inscribed on the List of the World Heritage in Danger as a result of two factors:
- a proposed iron-ore mining concession to an international consortium;
- the arrival of a large number of refugees to areas in and around the Guinean part of the site.
The granting of the concession was announced in 1992 and included portions of the WH site.
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”).