The World Heritage Centre received the State Party’s report on 7 February 2008, which details the progress made in implementing part of the decision taken by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007) and some of the recommendations of the 2007 reactive monitoring mission . These are:
a) Full and systematic implementation of the management plan: Secure sustainable funding, abide by prescribed courses of action and policies, adhere to prescribed institutional arrangements, for the conservation, presentation and revalorization of the property:
The State Party has created a specific unit (Unidad Ejecutora 110) for the implementation of the management plan. It has allocated USD 3,300,000 in 2007 for the emergency phase and has secured a budget of USD 1,667,000 for 2008. It is foreseen that this considerable budget will continue for the next five years, so if adequately implemented it should allow a better state of conservation to be achieved.
b) Enforce legislative and regulatory frameworks already passed by the State Party to address the issues of illegal occupations and activities at the property. Collaborate with pertinent authorities for the relocation of settlers:
The National Institute of Culture (INC) has continued with defence actions and coordinated with partner agencies for the recovery of the site. Regulatory measures prescribed in Law No. 28261 have yet to be approved (they have been pending for several years). Until the Law is in force, it is not possible to proceed with the relocation of illegal occupants at the property.
c) Broad dissemination of the management plan amongst interest groups to strengthen public and private support in its implementation:
The State Party reports that the implementation unit has carried out a series of exhibitions and conferences to disseminate conservation endeavours. The National Institute of Culture has widely distributed the master plan´s executive summary and the full text in digital format and has also set into its context every activity implemented at the site.
d) Collaboration with allied entities in defining regulatory measures for the management of the buffer zone and of the World Heritage property. Precise plans of the property and its zoning need to be circulated amongst stakeholders:
The National Institute of Culture has worked on strengthening collaboration with different municipalities associated to the site. Progress has been made in coordinating regulatory measures for the buffer zone, in accordance with objectives and principles set out in the master plan. This will be included in the updated version of the Metropolitan Development Plan for Trujillo. The boundaries for the property have been revised and a new georeferenced plan is now in final revision stages.
e) Physical delineation of the World Heritage property: vegetation barriers, perimeter walls, etc.:
Progress has been made in this respect, particularly the restoration of the perimeter walls.
f) Priority conservation measures: control and mitigation of water table levels, conservation of perimeter walls, backfilling of fragile areas with decorated surfaces:
Interventions have been carried out in two phases: an emergency one where most pressing matters were addressed, including mitigation of water table levels, vegetation cleaning, amongst others, and a post–emergency phase, currently taking place, where actions prescribed in the management plan are now being implemented. This is expected to improve the situation assessed during the 2007 reactive monitoring mission where inappropriate projects were being implemented, including the excavation and exposure of new areas.
g) Development of an emergency and disaster preparedness plan:
No progress has been reported on this recommendation.
The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies remain concerned at the extent and degree of the interventions and the limited numbers of specialized technical personnel to supervise widespread conservation activities. It is critical that capacity building and technical training is considered inherently in the implementation of projects. The implementation unit should also consider a broad technical participatory decision-making process, particularly enforcing collaboration between archaeologists, conservators and architects.