Advanced search

State of Conservation (SOC)

Tipasa (1989)

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property

Requests Approved: 0 (from1989-1989)
Total Amount Ap proved: 2,500USD

1989 Contribution to a survey on the urban development of Tipasa   2,500  USD
Missions**
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Corrective Measures
Current conservation issues

The Committee noted that following an earthquake at Tipasa in Algeria, a preliminary mission by a member of the Secretariat had been completed which reported that some damage had occurred.

An emergency assistance request had been submitted to the Secretariat which is continuing to cooperate with the managers of the property

Conclusion
Decision

  • Adopted

  • Draft Decision

13COMIX.19
Link to the decision

19. The Committee noted that following an earthquake at Tipasa in Algeria, a preliminary mission by a member of the Secretariat had been completed which reported that some damage had occurred. An emergency assistance request had been submitted to the Secretariat which is continuing to cooperate with the managers of the property.

 

No draft Decision

Tipasa
State Party:
Algeria
Date of Inscription: 1982
Nomination records (Year): 1981
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)(iv)
Documents
Original Documents
SC.89/CONF.004/12
Other Documents
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
Exports
Word File
SOC Reports
SOC Reports by year
2013
2011
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
1992
1990
1989
Detailed List of SOC reports
Threats*
Earthquake
Inscription on the Danger List
Year: 2002 -2006
Threats to the Site:
  • Deterioration of the archaeological vestiges;
  • Anthropic deterioration resulting from acts of vandalism (destruction, theft, waste dumping, etc);
  • Unsuitable restoration techniques;
  • Growing urbanisation on the outskirts of the site and the buffer zone;
  • Frequent property disputes with the owners or the public and private operators, and housing construction within the site;
  • Natural degradation due to sea salt, shoreline and wind erosion, and uncontrolled vegetation;
  • Inadequate conservation services in terms of qualified personnel, material and financial resources. 

* : 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.