Policy Compendium
2 - Policies Regarding CREDIBILITY of the World Heritage List
2.2 - Outstanding Universal Value
2.2.2 - World Heritage criteria
31. “The Committee decided to enter Auschwitz concentration camp on the List as a unique site and to restrict the inscription of other sites of a similar nature.”
| Theme: | 2.2.2.2 - Specific considerations related to criterion (vi) |
| Decision: | 3 COM XII.46 |
2 - Policies Regarding CREDIBILITY of the World Heritage List
4. "[The World Heritage Committee] (…) recalls that, in order to be effective, the upstream support should ideally take place at an early stage, preferably at the moment of the preparation or revision of the States Parties’ Tentative Lists."
| Theme: | 2.4 - Upstream Process |
| Decision: | 41 COM 9A |
2 - Policies Regarding CREDIBILITY of the World Heritage List
2.7 - Types of World Heritage properties
4. "[The World Heritage Committee] reiterates that due to the complexity of mixed site nominations and their evaluation, States Parties should ideally seek prior advice from IUCN and ICOMOS, if possible at least two years before a potential nomination is submitted, in compliance with Paragraph 122 of the Operational Guidelines."
| Theme: | 2.7.1 - Cultural, Natural and Mixed Properties |
| Decision: | 41 COM 9B |
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.
With the Support of
