State of Conservation (SOC)
Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (1996)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:26,000USD
|1993||Emergency measures to prevent the collapse of some of the caves ...||26,000 USD|
September 1996: UNESCO expert mission
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Current conservation issues
A UNESCO mission, undertaken in September 1996, revealed a number of major problems, including complete halt of site excavations, since a number of years due to lack of research funds and lack of adequate maintenance of the site. The site museum needs to be refurbished, including better presentation of the findings. From the point of view of continuity of excavations in the future, the lack of a new generation of researchers constitutes another serious problem.
Analysis and Conclusion
The Bureau may wish to adopt the following text and transmit it to the Committee for noting:
"The Bureau takes note of the report provided by the Secretariat and requests the authorities of China to inform the Committee of the management and research programme for this site."
Link to the decision
VII.47 Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (People's Republic of China)
A UNESCO mission, undertaken in September 1996, revealed a number of major problems, including the complete halt of site excavations, lack of adequate maintenance of the site and the lack of a new generation of researchers.
The Committee took note of the report provided by the Director of the UNESCO Division for Cultural Heritage who attended the first international Technical Committee on the Peking Man Site from 25 to 27 November 1996. The Technical Committee recommended enhancement in the protection of the site, especially the Upper Cave, improvement of the site museum and research facilities as well as to further scientific research.
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
Lack of maintenance ; Halt of site excavations
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”).