Policy Compendium
a) Incorporate well-designed buffer zones based on a holistic understanding of natural as well as human induced factors affecting the property, supported by reinforcing relevant legal, policy, awareness and incentive mechanisms, into new nominations and where appropriate into existing properties to ensure enhanced protection of World Heritage properties,
b) Place particular emphasis on strategic environmental assessment and impact assessments for potential projects within buffer zones to avoid, negative impacts on OUV from developments and activities in these zones,
c) Develop buffer zone protection and management regimes that optimize the capture and sharing of benefits to communities to support the aspirations of the 2015 Policy for the integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention,
d) Ensure buffer zones are supported by appropriate protection and management regimes in line with the property’s OUV, that build connectivity with the wider setting in cultural, environmental and landscape terms."
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Decision: | 44 COM 7.2 |
15.c) "[The World Heritage Committee encourages States Parties to] (…) be proactive in relation to development and conservation of World Heritage properties by conducting a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) at the time of nomination to anticipate the impact of any potential development on the Outstanding Universal Value."
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Decision: | 35 COM 12E |
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Decision: | 39 COM 7 |
(…)
34. [The World Heritage Committee] (s)tresses the importance of carrying out Heritage Impact Assessments to evaluate and thereby avoid or manage potential threats to the OUV of the property arising from new urban development projects."
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Decision: | 44 COM 7.2 |
Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
The World Heritage Committee requests the States Parties to provide, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, detailed information on the planning and design of proposed and on-going projects, which may impact on the visual integrity of the World Heritage property or its immediate and wider setting, and undertake a visual impact study, for review by the Advisory Bodies, prior to approval and implementation and before making any decisions that would be difficult to reverse (Based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
See for examples Decisions: | 27 COM 7B.67 28 COM 15B.74 28 COM 15B.71 31 COM 7B.94 31 COM 7B.90 31 COM 7B.89 32 COM 7B.72 33 COM 7B.113 35 COM 7B.96 37 COM 7B.96 38 COM 7B.42 41 COM 7B.43 41 COM 7B.23 |
The World Heritage Committee requests the States Parties to ensure that development is not permitted if it would impact individually or cumulatively on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
See for examples Decisions: | 36 COM 7B.8 38 COM 7B.69 38 COM 7B.62 39 COM 7B.15 40 COM 7B.105 41 COM 7B.42 43 COM 7B.4 44 COM 8B.38 |
2. "(…) The relationship between World Heritage and tourism is two way: tourism, if managed well, offers benefits to World Heritage properties and can contribute to cross-cultural exchange but, if not managed well, poses challenges to these properties (…);
Attachment A. Policy orientations: defining the relationship between World Heritage and tourism2. (...)
Tourism is critical for World Heritage:
a. For States Parties and their individual properties,
i. to meet the requirement in the Convention to 'present' World Heritage;
ii. to realise community and economic benefits.
b. For the World Heritage Convention as a whole, as the means by which World Heritage properties are experienced by visitors travelling nationally and internationally,
c. As a major means by which the performance of World Heritage properties, and therefore the standing of the Convention, is judged,
i. many World Heritage properties do not identify themselves as such, or do not adequately present their Outstanding Universal Value;
ii. it would be beneficial to develop indicators of the quality of presentation, and the representation of the World Heritage brand.
d. As a credibility issue in relation to: i. the potential for tourism infrastructure to damage Outstanding Universal Value
i. the threat that World Heritage properties may be unsustainably managed in relation to their adjoining communities;
ii. sustaining the conservation objectives of the Convention whilst engaging with economic development;
iii. realistic aspirations that World Heritage can attract tourism."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 34 COM 5F.2 |
5. "[The World Heritage Committee] also noting that tourism development in and around World Heritage properties is a key issue for their management, strongly encourages States Parties to ensure sustainable planning and management of tourism at World Heritage properties and to contribute to the implementation of the World Heritage Centre’s World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 38 COM 7 |
46. "[The World Heritage Committee] requests States Parties to develop Visitor Management Plans that assess appropriate carrying capacity of properties for visitors and address the issue of unregulated tourism."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
Threats: | Changes in traditional ways of life and knowledge system Identity, social cohesion, changes in local population and community Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation Indigenous hunting, gathering and collecting Ritual / spiritual / religious and associative uses Society's valuing of heritage |
11. Noting that the protection of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) must be a central objective for all World Heritage properties, requests States Parties to develop visitor management plans and strategies that address the seasonality of tourism (smoothing visitor numbers over time and spreading visitors across sites), encourage longer more in-depth experiences promoting tourism products and services that reflect natural and cultural values, and limit access and activities to improve visitor flows and experiences, while reducing pressures on the attributes which underpin OUV."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 43 COM 7.3 |
The World Heritage Committee recommends States Parties to develop a comprehensive tourism management plan or a sustainable tourism strategy, including a set of measures to address the tourism pressure on the site (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7B.17 36 COM 7B.78 36 COM 7B.17 37 COM 7B.19 38 COM 7B.92 38 COM 7B.27 39 COM 7B.61 40 COM 7B.81 40 COM 7B.74 40 COM 7B.50 |
At sites with a high tourism pressure, the World Heritage Committee requests States Parties to put in place all necessary strategic, planning and management frameworks as well as legal regulations for cruise ship tourism, including identification of the sustainable carrying capacity of the site and an analysis of the impact on the World Heritage property by cruise ships (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
See for examples Decisions: | 31 COM 7B.24 38 COM 7B.27 40 COM 7B.52 40 COM 7B.50 |
The World Heritage Policy Compendium was elaborated thanks to the generous contribution of the Government of Australia.
The World Heritage Policy Compendium On-line tool was developed thanks to the generous contribution of the Government of Korea.