State of Conservation (SOC)
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)
Factors affecting the property in 2002*
- Fire (widlfires)
- Ground transport infrastructure
- Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Dam construction (issue resolved);
- Power line development (issue resolved);
- Wild fires (issue resolved);
- Urbanization of the valley;
- Helicopters flights
- Damages due to a crane accident (issue resolved)
International Assistance granted to the property until 2002
Requests Approved: 0
Total Amount Approved: 166,625USD
|2001||Request for a stone specialist for the assessment of necessary ...||5,000 USD|
|1992||Financial contribution for a training workshop on architectural ...||19,325 USD|
|1992||Organization of a training course for technicians, administrators ...||19,500 USD|
|1991||Preparation of a Master Plan for Machu Picchu||40,000 USD|
|1991||Additional costs for technical consultancy for the preparation of ...||6,000 USD|
|1991||Contribution to a monitoring exercise of the following sites: ...||3,300 USD|
|1991||Additional cost for technical consultancy for the preparation of ...||4,000 USD|
|1989||Preparation of a technical cooperation project for a Master Plan ...||15,000 USD|
|1988||Contribution to purchase of fire-fighting equipment and repairing ...||20,000 USD|
|1986||Support for associated training activities related to Machu Picchu||8,000 USD|
|1986||Financial support for the implementation of the management plan ...||26,500 USD|
Missions to the property until 2002**
1997: joint ICOMOS/IUCN mission; October 1999: joint ICOMOS/IUCN mission; February-March 2002: joint UNESCO / IUCN / ICOMOS monitoring mission
|2002||Report on the state of conservation of the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru) (English only)|
|1999||Report of the WHC/IUCN/ICOMOS Mission to Machu Picchu, Peru, 18-25 October 1999|
Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 2002
25th session of the Bureau (Chapter V.195):
The Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu has been discussed at several sessions of the Committee and the Bureau, particularly with reference to the management and planning for the Sanctuary as well as a proposed project for the construction of a cable car.
- Implementation of the recommendations of the 1999 mission;
- Policies on the commercial use of the site;
- Restoration carried out after the Intihuatana sundial accident;
- Research efforts carried out on the landslide risks.
The State Party submitted, on 6 December 2001, a detailed report stating that almost all the recommendations of the 1999 mission had been followed, including a plan for the village of Aguas Calientes, detailed studies on the carrying capacity of, and the means of access to the Sanctuary and its components, the limitation of visitor facilities in the area surrounding the Ciudadela, and the desirability of extending the site. However, from other reports received through the UNESCO Lima Office, gradual deterioration seems to continue.
In addition, a “Landslide risk mitigation Symposium” took place from 21 to 26 January 2002, at the Disaster Prevention Research Institute of the Kyoto University, (Japan) whereby an agreement was reached between the Institute and the Peruvian experts on the process to be followed to continue the research on the Machu Picchu landslides risks.
Additional information should be made available to the Bureau, on all the above-mentioned issues, following the 24 February to 1 March 2002 joint UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS mission.
The Bureau may wish to examine information that may be made available at the time of its session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2002
The 24 February -1 March 2002 joint UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS extensive mission report is available as document WHC-02/CONF.202/INF.10, attached to this document is the letter addressed to the highest relevant authorities as well as the recommendations made by the Bureau at its 26th session. The report concludes by formulating a series of 38 specific recommendations. On the basis of the findings of the mission, the Committee may wish to take note of these recommendations as well as of the recommendations made by the Bureau. While it may recognize the progress made in certain aspects, particularly the management of the Camino Inca, it may wish to express its very serious concern about the continued inadequacy of the management and planning arrangements for the Sanctuary.
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2002
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)The World Heritage Committee,
1. Takes note of the mission recommendations as well as of the recommendations made by the Bureau;
2. Expresses its very serious concern about the continued inadequacy of the management and planning arrangements for the Sanctuary while recognizing the recent progress made in certain aspects, particularly the management of the Camino Inca and the establishment of the new Presidential decree;
3. Encourages the Peruvian authorities to continue co-operating with the World Heritage Centre in view of the implementation of measures leading to an improved management of the site, in particular through funds already allocated, the nomination of a site manager for the implementation of the Master Plan and the participation of all the stakeholders through inter-sectorial work;4. Requests the State Party to submit by 1 February 2003, a progress report for examination at its 27th session in June/July 2003.
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)
XII.56 The Bureau was informed that the State Party had submitted, on 6 December 2001, a detailed report stating that almost all the recommendations of the 1999 mission had been followed, including a plan for the village of Aguas Calientes, detailed studies on the carrying capacity of, and the means of access to the Sanctuary and its components, the limitation of visitor facilities in the area surrounding the Ciudadela, and the desirability of extending the site. However, from other reports received through the UNESCO Lima Office, gradual deterioration seems to continue.
XII.57 In addition, a “Landslide Risk Mitigation Symposium” took place from 21 to 26 January 2002, at the Disaster Prevention Research Institute of the Kyoto University (Japan) whereby an agreement was reached between the Institute and the Peruvian experts on the process to be followed to continue the research on the Machu Picchu landslide risks.
XII.58 The site has been of serious concern to the World Heritage Committee since 1996. The management arrangements and planning mechanisms for the preservation of the Sanctuary, a proposed cable car from Aguas Calientes to the Ciudadela and a hotel extension, as well as damage to the Intihuantana sundial have been the main motives for this concern.
XII.59 Three monitoring missions have been undertaken to the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, in 1997, 1999 and 2002, to assess the management and planning of the site. The most recent mission was to assess the implementation of the recommendations of the 1999 mission and, in response to damage caused to the Intihuatana sundial, to look into the policy for the commercial use of the site. The mission was undertaken from 25 February to 1 March 2002 and found that only a few of the recommendations of the 1999 mission had been fully implemented:
- Planning and management arrangements for the Sanctuary have improved only marginally and remain inadequate as many stakeholders continue to act in their own self-interest. The strategies of the Master Plan have not been translated into clear planning and action, although an improvement is to be noted in the Operational Plan for the year 2002.
- The Machu Picchu Programme, funded under a debt-swap arrangement with Finland, has provided sound information on, and analysis of, many of the critical problems confronting the Sanctuary. However, this information has been used only rarely as the basis for concrete decisions and action.
- Access to the Sanctuary and to the Ciudadela remains as it has been for many years and the contract for the study and eventual construction of the proposed cable car has been cancelled.
- A study on carrying capacity of the Camino Inca has been completed and a regulation for the use of the Inca Trail has been introduced, which is probably the most important progress that has been made in the Sanctuary.
- Terms of reference for development of a Public Use Plan for the Sanctuary are currently being developed in preparation for out-sourcing of this critical work. The Public Use Plan will be pivotal in terms of determining carrying capacities, alternatives for access, and the safety of Aguas Calientes for visitor use. These are critical factors that should be used as the basis for planning visitor services and facilities.
- While urban development and natural disaster mitigation plans have been developed for the village of Aguas Calientes, they have not been implemented nor have their recommendations been followed.
- Scientific and financial support for management of the Sanctuary remains a critical issue for which the Machu Picchu Programme has provided interim solutions, but the Programme will terminate this year. Urgent consideration should be given to the establishment of a permanent, independent, and international institution to provide scientific support to the management of the Sanctuary. There is also a need to immediately establish, as indicated in the Master Plan, a Trust Fund for Machu Picchu, to facilitate the collection, transparent management, and distribution of revenues in accordance with the priorities and strategies outlined in the Master Plan.
- The damage caused to the Intihuantana sundial during filming of a beer commercial has demonstrated that current regulation of commercial use of the site is inadequate. Efforts are underway to augment both regulation and supervision of such activities in the future. Studies have been undertaken that indicate restoration of the damage to be feasible, but little can be done until the legal and administrative processes against the party causing the damage have been resolved. In the meantime, it would be useful to establish a technical commission to study the reports, and make a firm recommendation regarding the restoration.
XII.60 The extensive mission report, to be distributed during the next Committee session, concludes by formulating a series of 38 specific recommendations. On the basis of the findings of the mission and after a brief debate, the Bureau noted the report of the 2002 UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS mission and its recommendations. While recognising that progress has been made in certain aspects, particularly the management of the Camino Inca, it expressed its very serious concern about the continued inadequacy of the management and planning arrangements for the Sanctuary. The Bureau requested the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee to write a letter to the highest level competent authorities to invite the Peruvian Government to address these issues as a matter of urgency.
XII.61 The Bureau, furthermore, invited the Government of Peru to consider the report and recommendations of the mission of 2002 and to submit an intermediary response by 15 September 2002, and a full report on the implementation of the recommendations of the missions of 1999 and 2002 by 1 February 2003 for consideration of the Bureau in April 2003.
XII.62 The Bureau requested the Secretariat in co-operation and consultation with the Advisory Bodies concerned, to maintain close communications with and advise the Government of Peru on the implementation of the recommendations of the mission.
The Committee may also wish to examine additional information that may be made available at the time of its 26th session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.
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”).