State of Conservation (SOC)

Requests Approved: 0 (from1978-2008)
Total Amount Ap proved: 293,171USD

2001, 2006 and 2010: joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN reactive monitoring missions 

a) Declining populations of Walia ibex, Ethiopian wolf and other large mammal species;

b) Increasing human populations and livestock numbers in the park;

c) Agricultural encroachment;

d) Road construction.

See Decision 30 COM 7A.9(Vilnius, 2006), http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/30COM/decisions/

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures

No precise timeframe was set so far although the World Heritage Committee mentioned that the corrective measures could be implemented in the short term (1-2 years).

The State Party did not submit a report on the state of conservation of the property, as requested at the 34th session of the World Heritage Committee, and thus almost no information is available regarding progress in addressing the corrective measures. This report only considers the priority actions identified by the 2009 monitoring mission for the 3 corrective measures which were not considered completed.

a) Improve the on-the-ground demarcation of the property and finalize its gazetting into national law

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN have no new information about the progress made in improving the ground demarcation or the re-gazetment procedures by the parliament. IUCN notes that not all of the proposed new boundary appears to be geo-referenced and hence is imprecise in relation to current forest boundaries, cultivated land, and villages. This calls for proper mapping and fine-tuning before demarcation on the ground is finalized, and legal gazetting at the national level.

b) Review the Grazing Pressure Reduction Strategy to identify priorities and partners and funding for its implementation

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN do not have new information concerning the requested update on the grazing strategy. The critical issue remains the requirement to raise the necessary funds to implement the requested actions, in conjunction with the development of an alternative livelihoods strategy (see below).

c) Identify and implement the lessons learned from the recent successful voluntary relocation of 165 households from the village of Arkwasiye, and seek support from development NGO, donors and the government for the provision of alternative livelihoods

According to the available information, funding has not yet been secured, and no significant progress has been made in finding alternative livelihoods for those who remain resident inside the park.

Donor conference

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN reiterate that to implement the grazing strategy and to address the issue of alternative livelihoods, it is crucial that funding is mobilized from the government and donors. They note that a proposed date for the donor conference requested by the World Heritage Committee was postponed in February 2010, and that a new proposal for a date of the conference has still not been suggested. The available funding to organize the conference, which was secured in 2009 under the budget line for sites on the List of World Heritage in danger under the World Heritage Fund, is unfortunately no longer available, given that the activity was not implemented in the planned timeframe. The World Heritage Centre, through the UNESCO Addis Ababa office, at several occasions reminded the State Party of the need to organize the conference as soon as possible, but so far no new proposed dates were put forward. 

Extension of the World Heritage property

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN reiterate the importance of bringing forward an extension of the property to reflect the boundary changes to the National Park (extensions as well as the exclusion of certain villages). They recommended this project as one of the potential priorities for upstream support. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN also reiterate that the documentation for this extension does not need to be as extensive as a nomination for a new property and that the State Party could request International Assistance from the World Heritage Fund to obtain consultant support to prepare the necessary documentation. IUCN remains willing to provide technical advice and identify expert support to assist the State Party in addressing the requirements of a new nomination. 

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recommend that the World Heritage Committee regret that no report was received from the State Party and that there appears to have been little or no significant progress on the outstanding actions that would address the remaining corrective measures for the property since the 34th session of the World Heritage Committee. They, therefore, also recommend, that the World Heritage Committee maintain this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. They also draw the World Heritage Committee’s attention on the need for supportive action to assist Simien Mountains National Park as a priority by the World Heritage Centre, IUCN and partners in the follow-up to the recently completed Periodic Report for Africa. They note that with appropriate commitment by the State Party, and investment of conservation finance, the property has the potential to be considered for removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger within a foreseeable future. The African World Heritage Fund may also be in a position to facilitate support and funding for the required actions.