Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Uplifting the perception of the List of World Heritage in Danger

The World Heritage Centre has developed a project with the objective to conduct an overall reflection and study on the image/perception of the List of World Heritage in Danger and to propose approches aiming at reversing this negative perception and highlight both the implications and the benefits of this fundamental component of the Reactive Monitoring framework.

Since a couple of years, debates at the World Heritage Committee highlight that the List of World Heritage in Danger (LWHD) is unfortunately often perceived as a sanction, and that, inscription on this List is not perceived in the same way by all States Parties concerned; with some applying for the inscription of a property to focus international attention on its problems and to obtain expert assistance in solving them while others wishing to avoid such inscription by all means.

The Committee decided to formally address this issue and hence called for a “better understanding of the implications and benefits of properties being inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, and to develop appropriate information material in this regard with a view to overcome the negative perceptions of the List of World Heritage in Danger” (Decision 40 COM 7).

To address this issue, the World Heritage Centre developed a project with the objective to conduct an overall reflection and study on the image/perception of the LWHD. A contractor with expertise in strategic marketing, branding and communication has been identified (“Beyond Borders Media”) and tasked with investigating the reasons why a negative perception overshadows the LWHD, as well as suggesting ways forward to change the mindset towards the LWHD into a more positive perception. This activity has benefitted from the generous support of the State Party of the Norway (see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/partners/381/).

The methodology for the independent Study included data and information gathering through a desk review of statutory texts, working and information documents, webpages and Committee’ decisions as well as prior studies on the topic. The Contractor also undertook a total of 30 in-depth interviews with the Secretariat, the Advisory Bodies, State Party and civil society representatives, Committee members and experts, as needed, ensuring as far as possible that the interviewees form a geographically and gender balanced group, also representing all categories of properties (cultural/natural). An online survey was also addressed to all stakeholders of the Convention, in which 220 respondents took part.

The Study seeks to understand the dynamics of the List of World Heritage in Danger through the eyes of its fans and detractors alike and provide a snapshot of how it is being understood, misunderstood, used, underused, appreciated, or criticized. The overall goal is to use this knowledge to launch a new beginning for this essential element of the World Heritage Convention.

The Study entitled “New Visions for the List of World Heritage in Danger” presents insights into the role and reputation of the LWHD and looks at current discussions on this List, including general attitudes on its role and efficacy, highlighting that, even if as a concept, the LWHD is perceived as an excellent tool for conservation and awareness-raising, it is however clearly facing a range of challenges.

The results presented in this Study echo the many voices and multiple perspectives that have been considered throughout the research process, and reflect their impressions, frustrations, and hopes for the future of the LWHD. The Study concludes with a series of five recommendations on communication approaches to raise the profile of the LWHD as a positive tool, crucial for the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties. These recommendations call for “fresh perspectives on dealing with endangered heritage” and emphasize that “the LWHD can be a powerful lever of change, spurring action, starting a conversation, inspiring cooperation and opening up channels of resources and mutual support”.

Full details for each recommendation, with its aims, communication channels, target audiences and approaches, are presented in Section 6 of the Study at http://whc.unesco.org/en/158/.

Progress made

The Study was presented to the World Heritage Committee at its extended 45th session (Riyadh, 2023). 

In its Decision 45 COM 7.1, reaffirming the need to promote a better understanding of the implications and benefits of properties being inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, the World Heritage Committee took note with appreciation of the thorough study on the perceptions of the List of World Heritage in Danger, together with its recommendations that could form the basis of a communication strategy and thanked the State Party of Norway for its financial support. 

The World Heritage Committee also expressed its gratitude to all the stakeholders of the 1972 World Heritage Convention who have actively contributed to this study and further took note with satisfaction of the recommendations formulated in the Study on possible approaches to reverse negative perceptions and to raise the profile of the List of World Heritage in Danger as a positive tool, enhancing understanding and highlighting its importance for the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties.

Finally, the World Heritage Committee requested all stakeholders of the Convention to take them on-board and implement them at their level as soon as possible. 


Partners

This project was made possible thanks to the financial support of the Norwegian Government.

Contacts
Richard Veillon (UNESCO)
Strategic objectives
Conservation
Decisions / Resolutions (1)
Code: 45COM 7.1

The World Heritage Committee,

Climate Action for World Heritage

  1. Having examined Document WHC/23/45.COM/7,
  2. Recalling Decisions 40 COM 7 and 44 COM 7C adopted at its 40th session (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016) and at its extended 44th session (Fuzhou/online, 2021),
  3. Notes that the Panel of experts in relation to Decision 44 COM 7C concerning climate change and World Heritage met by end of March 2022 and made recommendations on the amendments proposed by the Members of the World Heritage Committee and provided a report to the Open-ended Working Group of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention on Climate Change;
  4. Also notes that the Open-ended Working Group of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention on Climate Change has met seven times to discuss the proposed amendments and the recommendations of the Panel of experts;
  5. Recognizes Climate Action for World Heritage as an important thematic area of work, thanks the Governments of Australia, Azerbaijan and the Netherlands for their generous financial support and invites States Parties to contribute towards this thematic area to enable the Secretariat to support activities related to the development of the updated Policy Document on Climate Action for World Heritage and its dissemination;
  6. Recalls again Decision 41 COM 7 in which the Committee ‘reiterate[d] the importance of States Parties undertaking the most ambitious implementation of the Paris Agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and by pursuing efforts to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change” ’, again strongly urges all States Parties to undertake actions to address Climate Change under the Paris Agreement consistent with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances, that are fully consistent with their obligations within the World Heritage Convention to protect the Outstanding Universal Value of all World Heritage properties;

     

    Improving the perception of the List of World Heritage in Danger

  7. Recalling Decision 40 COM 7 adopted at its 40th session (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016),
  8. Reaffirming the need to promote a better understanding of the implications and benefits of properties being inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger,
  9. Takes note with appreciation of the thorough study on the perceptions of the List of World Heritage in Danger, together with its recommendations that could form the basis of a communication strategy and thanks the State Party of Norway for its financial support;
  10. Expresses its gratitude to all the stakeholders of the 1972 World Heritage Convention who have actively contributed to this study;
  11. Takes note with satisfaction of the recommendations formulated in the study on possible approaches to reverse negative perceptions and to raise the profile of the List of World Heritage in Danger as a positive tool, enhancing understanding and highlighting its importance for the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties and requests all stakeholders of the Convention to take them on-board and implement them at their level as soon as possible;


    Enhancing dialogue among States Parties, Advisory Bodies and the World Heritage Centre

  12. Recommends that the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies ensure the following steps regarding the monitoring of state of conservation of the inscribed properties:
    1. Whenever an expert mission takes place within the framework of the reactive monitoring process, the draft mission report will be shared, prior to its publication, with the concerned State Party to allow them to review the report and to propose corrections on any factual inaccuracies and comment on other critical issues and/or misunderstandings, and consultations will be held, if necessary, between the concerned State Party and relevant Advisory Body/ies;
    2. Whenever an expert mission takes place within the framework of the reactive monitoring process and the inscription of the concerned property on the List of World Heritage in Danger is recommended in the mission report, consultations will be held between the concerned State Party and relevant Advisory Body/ies, and the State Party’s view will be referred to in the mission report or in its annex in the event that the views of both parties do not converge in the consultations;
    3. Whenever the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger is proposed in a working document on state of conservation produced by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to be examined by the Committee, consultations will be held, within the available deadlines, prior to the distribution of the document, between the concerned State Party, relevant Advisory Body/ies and the World Heritage Centre, and the State Party’s view will be referred to in the working document such as in its annex in the event that the views of the concerned parties do not converge;
  13. Recommends that States Parties enhance dialogue among themselves regarding properties that are or may be proposed for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in particular cases in which causes of the danger are transboundary;
  14. Recommends that the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies continue to work on knowledge sharing of best practice cases in which the property was removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger, and also encourage them to enhance providing capacity building for the States Parties who have properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger;
  15. Recommends that the budget of the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies be adjusted in proportion with the additional workload generated by the additional dialogue and consultations as well as for capacity building for States Parties with properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Read more about the decision
top