Pirin National Park

• Commercial development (developments in the Bansko ski zone)
• Management systems/ management plan (lack of effective management mechanisms)
• Management and institutional factors (boundary issues)
• Illegal activities (illegal logging) 

Total amount granted: USD 24,915 of financial support from the Participation Programme of UNESCO for development of a strategy for sustainable tourism (2010)

On 26 November 2019, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/225/documents/, and providing the following information:

• The Court case regarding the Ministry of Environment and Water’s (MOEW) decision that no Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is required for the new draft Management Plan for Pirin National Park (PNP) is still ongoing and the new Management Plan has therefore not yet been finalized;
• The amendments to the current 2004 Management Plan, adopted by the Council of Ministers in December 2017, altering regulations regarding permitted activities and allowing for expansion of recreational facilities and infrastructure in the buffer zone, have been repealed by a Court ruling. In compliance with the Court’s decision, no further development plans, spatial planning or other proposals related to the repealed amendments have been undertaken;
• The current Management Plan does not provide for strategic planning of socio-economic and spatial developments or land use. Although development plans and construction projects are subject to SEAs, Appropriate Assessments (AA) and stakeholder participation, there is no overarching strategy or collaboration with neighboring municipalities to oversee, plan and develop a common approach and long-term vision for the PNP and surrounding area;
• During the 2018-2019 period, the MOEW approved a number of Investment Proposals within the property, which were subject to a screening procedure for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and AAs. These projects include improved access and infrastructure for people with disabilities at Yavorov hut, erosion control measures and slope stabilization, strengthening and reconstruction of two pillars of a cable car, construction of additional water supply infrastructure and reconstruction of existing water supply pipelines and water collection facilities, including within the property, as well as projects to improve the conservation status of certain habitats and species. Regarding infrastructure projects, the State Party notes it was concluded that none were likely to cause negative impacts on the property. No information or details about the results of the EIAs and AAs were provided by the State Party.

On 29 April 2020, the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) confirmed the rejection of Decision № EO-1 by the MOEW to not implement an SEA of the draft new Management Plan of PNP. On 10 June 2020, the State Party confirmed to the World Heritage Centre that the MOEW complied with the Court decision and will take the necessary follow-up action.

The information provided by the State Party that the finalization of the new Management Plan for the property remained pending and awaiting the SAC’s decision is noted. Noting also the subsequent SAC decision rejecting the MOEW’s conclusion that no SEA is needed for the new Management Plan, it is therefore appropriate, in acknowledging this ruling, that the Committee requests the State Party to ensure the SEA is completed for the new Management Plan as required, and that this is undertaken as a matter of priority. It is important to ensure that the SEA includes a specific assessment of potential impacts of the new Management Plan on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, including from potential development in areas located within its buffer zone. The new Management Plan should subsequently be developed based on the results of the completed SEA.

The management prescriptions within the new Management Plan will be fundamental to ensure the future protection of the property’s OUV. However, it should be recalled that the 2018 Advisory mission raised concerns about several approaches in the draft, especially regarding grazing, forest and water resource management, and tourism including tourism-related construction and infrastructure development. It is recommended the Committee request the State Party to ensure that the new Management Plan comprehensively addresses these threats and specifies how management priorities will help to maintain the OUV of the property including protection of its integrity. In addition, the recommendations of the IUCN 2018 Advisory mission should be taken into account, to consult NGOs and other stakeholders engaged in the draft Management Plan and its implementation, and to submit the draft Management Plan to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN, prior to its implementation.

The court decision to repeal the amendments to the current 2004 Management Plan, introduced by the Council of Ministers in 2017, is noted.  It is recalled that the World Heritage Centre and IUCN had expressed concern that the amendments would also allow for expansion of skiing infrastructure in the buffer zone of the property. The confirmation by the State Party, that in line with the court decision, no further actions have been undertaken on the development plans and proposals facilitated through these previous amendments, is therefore welcomed. It is reiterated that a common approach for future planning of socio-economic activities and development in the property, its buffer zone, adjacent municipalities and the broader region is critical for the sustainable management and protection of the property’s OUV. Such an approach needs to be enabled through compliance with relevant national legislation and regulations, consistent with the State Party’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention to maintain the property’s OUV and integrity. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to develop a strategic approach for all plans and programmes related to the property, which ensures that all potential future development is harmonised, coordinated and consistent with the above-mentioned regulations.

It is noted that the MOEW has approved several Investment Proposals including for additional water supply from reservoirs located within the PNP. Although the State Party reports that negative impacts on the property are unlikely, no assessment information has been provided including regarding potential impacts on the OUV. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to ensure that the potential impacts of these new projects are thoroughly assessed and that assessments are submitted to the World Heritage Centre for review by IUCN. Also recalling the 2018 IUCN Advisory mission recommendation, water abstraction volumes should be limited to the property’s water resource capacities so as to not affect its OUV, including the natural processes and ecological functions that underpin it.