50. The report of the Secretariat was presented and the voluntary work of the Bulgarian Delegate (study on the Mediaeval sites in the Balkans) and of the two experts seconded by the Greek Ministry of Culture for one month (three studies made available to the Committee). These three studies, on the Graeco-Hellenistic and correlated cultures, the Roman and correlated cultures and the Byzantine and correlated cultures were based on an examination of sites already listed, those on tentative lists and with the addition of sites proposed by the experts to fill gaps. In the case of Roman culture, a chart had been prepared which set out the nature of the sites, their period and their location. The full content of these three files and other material prepared by the Secretariat was described and was available for consultation by delegations. The Secretariat invited delegations to make known bibliographies which would be helpful in further development of the study.
51. The Committee congratulated the Greek and Bulgarian experts for their in-depth treatment of the areas in question and thanked them for their participation in the study, which was described as being of high quality and, indeed, of elegance.
52. Frameworks for national historic monuments had been developed in the U.S.A. and Canada and one of the delegates offered to make these frameworks and some account of their methodology available to the Secretariat. Another delegate commented on the importance of having a mixed temporal, cultural and thematic approach. It was suggested that the global study should include landscapes.
53. Another delegate, in expressing appreciation of the work done, said that her country would seek to contribute to the study in its future elaboration. The Secretariat explained that it intended to proceed by establishing the framework first with the assistance of experts and it was noted that an amount had been included in the budget from the various regions for this purpose. The possible contribution of expertise by States Parties was warmly welcomed and, where such contribution may not be possible, the Secretariat would in any case appreciate the names of appropriate experts whom the Secretariat could approach to work on the project.
54. Another delegate emphasized that it was not just a question of providing the framework but that it should be a carefully considered one. Due allowance should be made 'for the time and cost of such studies which should not be expected to be done in haste without adequate reflection: Furthermore, it is important that experts in the States Parties Provide information for the study since there is much available in languages which are not so easily accessible.
55. Another expert suggested reference to a specialist in the Institut de l'Afrique Noire and the Secretariat mentioned that there had already been discussion with Mr. Konare, President of ICOM, a historian and archaeologist, about the project.
56. The Committee thanked the Secretariat for the work done on the project.
57. The Committee also noted that the study of geological sites conducted jointly by the Unesco International Geological Correlation Programme and the International Union of Geological Sciences has resulted in a preliminary global tentative list of geological sites of outstanding universal value. This list was to be revised early in 1991 by a team of experts meeting at Unesco headquarters. The results of the study would then be finalized and made available for the next session of the World Heritage Committee.