State of Conservation
8
Reports
8
Properties
5
States Parties
Threats* :
| States Parties: |
Morocco
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev |
| Threats*: | Housing Interpretative and visitation facilities |
| Other Threats: | Need to preserve the landscape |
| States Parties: |
Oman
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev |
| Threats*: | Commercial development Housing |
| Other Threats: | Deterioration of the earthen structure of the Fort |
| States Parties: |
Egypt
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev |
| Threats*: | Housing |
| Other Threats: | Dilapidated infrastructure; Neglect and lack of maintenance |
| States Parties: |
Yemen
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7A |
| Threats*: | Housing |
| Other Threats: | Deterioration of the traditional urban fabric |
| States Parties: |
Morocco
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev |
| Threats*: | Commercial development |
| Other Threats: | a) Progressive deterioration of the built framework; b) Absence of a rehabilitation policy for the Mellah Quarter; c) Continuous collapse of the buildings and advanced deterioration of the maritime part of the fortified wall of the Medina |
| States Parties: |
Egypt
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev |
| Threats*: | Housing Interpretative and visitation facilities |
| States Parties: | Jerusalem (Site proposed by Jordan) |
| Year: | 2005 |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7A.Add |
| Threats*: | Housing |
| Other Threats: | a) Natural risk factors; b) Conservation of archaeological heritage; c) Deterioration of monuments; d) Alteration of the built fabric. |
| States Parties: |
Algeria
|
| Year: | 2005 |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| Document Source: | WHC-05/29.COM/7A |
| Threats*: | Housing |
| Other Threats: | vegetation with roots seriously affecting archaeological remains |
Properties
Categories
Regions
* :
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.

Morocco
Oman
Egypt
Yemen
Algeria

