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

53
Reports
22
Properties concerned
16
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:2004close
Threats* : Commercial developmentclose
Group of Monuments at Hampi (2004)
States Parties: India
Year: 2004
Document Source: WHC-04/28.COM/15A.Rev
Threats*: Commercial development
Danger List:  Yes
Hanseatic City of Lübeck (2003)
States Parties: Germany
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B
Threats*: Commercial development
Hanseatic City of Lübeck (2002)
States Parties: Germany
Year: 2002
Document Source: WHC-02/CONF.202/17
Threats*: Commercial development
Hanseatic City of Lübeck (2001)
States Parties: Germany
Year: 2001
Document Source: WHC-01/CONF.208/10
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (2003)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B
Threats*: Commercial development
Other Threats: Fire in December 2002
Historic Centre of Puebla (2000)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 2000
Document Source: WHC-2000/CONF.204/10
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (1999)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 1999
Document Source: WHC-99/CONF.209/14
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (1998)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 1998
Document Source: WHC-98/CONF.201/3B
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (1995)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 1995
Document Source: WHC-95/CONF.201/4
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (1994)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 1994
Document Source: WHC-94/CONF.001/3B Add.2,WHC-94/CONF.003/6,WHC-94/CONF.003/6 Add.
Threats*: Commercial development
Historic Centre of Puebla (1993)
States Parties: Mexico
Year: 1993
Document Source: WHC-93/CONF.002/5
Threats*: Commercial development
Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa (2004)
States Parties: Peru
Year: 2004
Document Source: WHC-04/28.COM/15B
Threats*: Commercial development
Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa (2003)
States Parties: Peru
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B
Threats*: Commercial development
Imperial Palaces of the Ming and Qing Dynasties in Beijing and Shenyang (2003)
States Parties: China
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B
Threats*: Commercial development
Medina of Essaouira (formerly Mogador) (2004)
States Parties: Morocco
Year: 2004
Document Source: WHC-04/28.COM/15B
Threats*: Commercial development
Other Threats: The general state of conservation of the property is a cause for concern
Meidan Emam, Esfahan (2004)
States Parties: Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Year: 2004
Document Source: WHC-04/28.COM/15B
Threats*: Commercial development
Meidan Emam, Esfahan (2003)
States Parties: Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B
Threats*: Commercial development
Meidan Emam, Esfahan (2002)
States Parties: Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Year: 2002
Document Source: WHC-02/CONF.201/11Rev,WHC-02/CONF.202/17
Threats*: Commercial development
Petra (2001)
States Parties: Jordan
Year: 2001
Document Source: WHC-2001/CONF.205/5
Threats*: Commercial development
Other Threats: Conservation of antiquities
Petra (2000)
States Parties: Jordan
Year: 2000
Document Source: WHC-2000/CONF.202/5,WHC-2000/CONF.204/10
Threats*: Commercial development
Other Threats: Conservation of antiquities
Properties
file_download
Categories
file_download
Regions
file_download
States Parties
Australia China Germany Guatemala India Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Jordan Lebanon Mexico Morocco Oman Peru Poland Tunisia United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Threats
Commercial development 53

* : 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