Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 1988
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/116/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 84,577
For details, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/116/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Total amount granted: USD 110,000 (Italian Funds-in-Trust); USD 23,100 (Croisi Europe); USD 86,900 (European Commission); USD 53,000 (Netherland Funds-in-Trust)
Previous monitoring missions
2002, 2005: World Heritage Centre missions; 2006: World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS/ICCROM Reactive Monitoring mission; 2014: World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
Illustrative material see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/116/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2016
The State Party did not submit a state of conservation report, which was requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015). Notwithstanding, a joint UNESCO/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission was carried out from 1 to 6 April 2016 so updated information can be presented regarding the concerns expressed by the Committee in 2014. The mission report is available online at the following web address: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/116/documents.
The mission assessed the current state of conservation of the property and the progress made in the implementation of the priority action plan adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session (Doha, 2014). It noted that security conditions have worsened and the current situation is not conducive to implement effectively the measures set forth in the action plan. Very little progress has been achieved and limited measures have been implemented, namely at the archaeological component of Djenné-Djeno (measures to mitigate erosion) and placing information panels. Financial and technical resources continue to be insufficient to address the magnitude of the task at hand both for the cultural mission and for the mayor’s office.
Consequently, the rate and extent of factors that pose a threat to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, and its conditions of authenticity and integrity, have been exacerbated. The archaeological sites, crucial component parts of the property, have continued to be affected by urban pressure given the lack of property titles and clear definitions of boundaries. Natural and human decline factors have also continued unabated, leading to significant erosion of the remains and exposure of artefacts. The historic fabric of the town has continued to degrade due to the lack of maintenance (largely in part due to the economic difficulties faced by local inhabitants) and long standing factors including the lack of enforcement of urban regulations to control encroachment and new informal construction and to prevent the use of inappropriate materials or interventions. The existing Management and Conservation Plan for the property remains unimplemented. Finally, the mission noted that issues related to solid waste management, sewage and general sanitation, highly detrimental to the local inhabitants, have been further exacerbated. Riverbanks are not only being used for solid waste deposits, there is also a significant number of illegal constructions in the area.
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM
The State Party has attempted in the past years to address the recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee. However, the difficult conditions and continued conflict that prevails in Mali have severely hindered the ability to implement the agreed upon priority action plan and to systematically address threatening factors and allocate sufficient financial, human and material resources for the task at hand.
The implementation of the Priority Action Plan was crucial to begin to reverse the detrimental impact of different factors on the OUV of the property. The 2014 mission noted that urgent action was needed so that the unique attributes and integrity and authenticity conditions were not further compromised. The 2016 mission could not verify any improvement in conditions and, in fact, underscored that the situation had further deteriorated. Current threats to the property correspond both to the criteria for ascertained and potential danger, in accordance with paragraphs 177 to 179 of the Operational Guidelines. In terms of ascertained danger, there is a serious deterioration of materials in the historic town, which, in conjunction with inappropriate interventions, have started to erode the architectural coherence of the town. Continued decay at the archaeological sites, both from natural and human-made factors have led to the erosion of the cultural significance of these crucial component parts of the property. In terms of potential danger, the lack of enforcement and implementation of regulatory and planning tools has increased pressures on the historic building stock and archaeological sites and is eroding the attributes that embody the OUV of the property.
Given the above considerations, and the lack of substantial progress verified by the 2016 mission, it is recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe the property on the List of the World Heritage in Danger. This would be an important call for action for various local stakeholders, and for the international community, so that the necessary corrective measures can be implemented to ensure a sustained and appropriate course of action that will guarantee the protection of the property. The Reactive Monitoring mission defined a preliminary list of corrective measures that are considered a priority for implementation within the next three years to begin addressing current threats to the property. This provisional list of corrective measures should be further developed by the State Party, in close consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to define the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR), in accordance to the established guidelines.
Decision Adopted: 40 COM 7B.13
The World Heritage Committee,
Decision Adopted: 40 COM 8C.1
The World Heritage Committee,