State of Conservation (SOC)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:2,000USD
|1996||Review of Lalibela's restoration programmes, in situ training at ...||2,000 USD|
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
At scientific level, since 1993, a five-year archaeological programme mobilizes annually a team of more than one hundred persons under the leadership of Dr. David W. Phillipson (University of Cambridge).
The persons responsible for this site are to be congratulated on its presentation, management and conservation. In addition, a master plan for the development of the city is being prepared in order to protect the surroundings of the major sites, prevent new constructions, and supervise certain areas of the city where important discoveries are expected in the near future. It is necessary to strengthen the role of the site manager:
- by providing him with documentation on the site and its restoration;
- by giving him the means to publish brochures presenting the site and its different monuments; and
- by upgrading the equipment available (cameras and measuring equipment, transportation) and provide him with the means to intervene rapidly in the event of new discoveries in the city and to make a more systematic survey of the numerous sites in Axum and its surroundings.
Analysis and Conclusion
The Bureau may wish to adopt the following recommendation and request the Committee to take note:
"The Bureau warmly thanks the Ethiopian authorities for all their efforts and the measures already taken to ensure the preservation and enhancement of this site. It asks the Centre for Research and Conservation of the Cultural Heritage (CRCCH) to continue its efforts and to ensure that the scientific documentation at the site be made available to the site manager. It reiterates that the compilation of this documentation is a prerequisite for the preparation of the management and conservation plans, and that UNESCO is always ready to provide, where necessary, assistance in obtaining documents that are not available in Ethiopia."
Link to the decision
A.1 TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION
A.1.3 Lalibela; Fasil Ghebi; Lower Valley of the Awash; Tiya; Aksum and Valley of of the Omo (Ethiopia) (US$ 27,500 requested)
Considering the quality and the well-chosen small-scale activities which are already partly funded by the Centre for Research and Conservation of Cultural Heritage (CRCCH) , and in order to backstop the remarkable achievements and commitments of CRCCH to conservation,
the Bureau approved an amount of US$ 27,500. Support from the World Heritage Fund will permit the funding of international experts to examine the studies and restoration programmes for Lalibela, to improve the presentation of Tiya and organize an in-situ training course in Gondar.
Link to the decision
VII.62 Aksum (Ethiopia)
The Bureau at its twentieth extraordinary session took note of the report provided by the Secretariat that the site management should be strengthened by providing and collecting scientific documentation at the site level as the basis for management and conservation planning, particularly in view of the master plan that is being prepared.
The Bureau warmly thanked the Ethiopian authorities for all their efforts and the measures already taken to ensure the preservation and enhancement of this site. It asked the Centre for Research and Conservation of the Cultural Heritage (CRCCH) to continue its efforts and to ensure that the scientific documentation at the site be made available to the site manager. It reiterated that the compilation of this documentation is a prerequisite for the preparation of the management and conservation plans, and that UNESCO is always ready to provide, where necessary, assistance in obtaining documents that are not available in Ethiopia.
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
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”).