State of Conservation (SOC)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:40,400USD
|1992||Mission to advise on the elaboration of a urban Master Plan for ...||9,000 USD|
|1991||Purchase of topographic equipment for the site of Tipasa||3,000 USD|
|1990||Expert mission to advise the authorities on the preparation of a ...||7,000 USD|
|1990||Consultants and equipment for urgent works on Tipasa following ...||18,900 USD|
|1989||Contribution to a survey on the urban development of Tipasa||2,500 USD|
July 1989: UNESCO expert mission; December 1989: UNESCO mission; March-April 1990: expert mission; October 1992: expert mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
[Oral report by ICOMOS and the Secretariat]
Link to the decision
Mr. Beschaouch indicated that he had personally ascertained the status of the site of Tipasa in Algeria during a visit in October 1992. This site had suffered the effects of an earthquake in October 1989 and emergency assistance had been granted by the Fund.
The remedial works had been completed in good conditions and a safeguard plan elaborated. He asked the Committee to recommend application of the safeguard plan in order to ensure the integrity of the site. The Committee adopted this proposal. Furthermore, Mr. Beschaouch raised the question of training of scientific and technical staff for the safeguard of Tipasa.
No draft Decision
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
SOC Reports2013 2011 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 1992 1990 1989
Detailed List of SOC reports
Inscription on the Danger ListYear: 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”).