Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
State of Conservation Search

State of Conservation

13
Reports
9
Properties concerned
8
States Parties with SOC reports
bar_chart Statistics view_list List table_chart Table pin_drop Map
Excel File .xls All SOC (Zip file) .zip
Date end:1994close
Threats* : Human resourcesclose
Site State Party Year Threats* Danger List
angkorAngkor cambodia Cambodia 1994 Human resources,
Other Threats: Urgent problems of conservation
 Yes
angkorAngkor cambodia Cambodia 1993 Human resources,
Other Threats: Urgent problems of conservation
 Yes
archaeological site of delphiArchaeological Site of Delphi greece Greece 1993 Human resources,
Other Threats: Need to strengthen the protection of the site
 No
archaeological site of delphiArchaeological Site of Delphi greece Greece 1992 Human resources,
Other Threats: Need to strengthen the protection of the site
 No
chavin (archaeological site)Chavin (Archaeological Site) peru Peru 1993 Human resources,
Other Threats: Deterioration of the site
 No
city of potosiCity of Potosí bolivia (plurinational state of) Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 1993 Human resources, No
delosDelos greece Greece 1994 Human resources, No
delosDelos greece Greece 1992 Human resources,
Other Threats: Adverse meteorological conditions
 No
hanseatic city of lubeckHanseatic City of Lübeck germany Germany 1994 Human resources, No
island of mozambiqueIsland of Mozambique mozambique Mozambique 1994 Human resources,
Other Threats: Precarious state of conservation of the stone
 No
kasbah of algiersKasbah of Algiers algeria Algeria 1994 Human resources, No
kathmandu valleyKathmandu Valley nepal Nepal 1993 Human resources,
Other Threats: Need for restoration/consolidation works
 No
kathmandu valleyKathmandu Valley nepal Nepal 1992 Human resources,
Other Threats: Need for restoration/consolidation works
 No

* : 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”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top