Policy Compendium
Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions
The World Heritage Committee requests States Parties to commit towards the protection of the intangible heritage attributes of the property and to ensure that sufficient attention is given to safeguarding these important attributes, as by developing a monitoring system of intangible heritage elements (based on case law on decisions on State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| See for examples Decisions: | 40 COM 7B.1 42 COM 7B.33 44 COM 7B.20 44 COM 7B.2 |
C. 4) "Apply the Ecosystem Approach
(…)
18. c) Consider landscape/seascape level issues when monitoring the state of conservation of World Heritage sites (…)."
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Source: | WHC-06/30.COM/INF.6A The World Heritage Centre's Natural Heritage Strategy |
Paragraph 96
“Protection and management of World Heritage properties should ensure that their Outstanding Universal Value, including the conditions of integrity and/or authenticity at the time of inscription, are sustained or enhanced over time. A regular review of the general state of conservation of properties, and thus also their Outstanding Universal Value, shall be done within a framework of monitoring processes for World Heritage properties, as specified within the Operational Guidelines.”| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 173
“The World Heritage Committee requests that reports of missions to review the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties include:
a) an indication of threats or significant improvement in the conservation of the property since the last report to the World Heritage Committee;
b) any follow-up to previous decisions of the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of the property;
c) information on any threat or damage to or loss of Outstanding Universal Value, integrity and/or authenticity for which the property was inscribed on the World Heritage List.”
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 181
“In addition, the threats and/or their detrimental impacts on the integrity of the property must be those which are amenable to correction by human action. In the case of cultural properties, both natural factors and human-made factors may be threatening, while in the case of natural properties, most threats will be human-made and only very rarely a natural factor (such as an epidemic disease) will threaten the integrity of the property. In some cases, the threats and/or their detrimental impacts on the integrity of the property may be corrected by administrative or legislative action, such as the cancelling of a major public works project or the improvement of legal status.”| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
"States Parties and managers of individual World Heritage properties will consider undertaking site-level monitoring, mitigation and adaptation measures, where appropriate”.
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Source: | Policy document on the impacts of climate change on World Heritage Properties (2008) |
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Decision: | 31 COM 5.2 |
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| Decision: | 43 COM 5E |
The World Heritage Committee recommends establishing key monitoring indicators to relate more directly to the Outstanding Universal Value to allow for judgment of changes in state of conservation, and adding specific indicators, periodicity and institutional responsibilities (based on Case law on decisions on Nominations).
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| See for examples Decisions: | 38 COM 8B.37 39 COM 8B.33 39 COM 8B.25 41 COM 8B.38 41 COM 8B.33 41 COM 8B.31 41 COM 8B.28 41 COM 8B.27 41 COM 8B.26 |
The World Heritage Committee encourages States Parties to monitor wildlife and populations, including key species, in order to assess the populations and trends (based on case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.2.1 - General |
| See for examples Decisions: | 37 COM 7B.11 38 COM 7B.92 40 COM 7B.70 40 COM 7B.69 41 COM 7A.15 |
Paragraph 169
“Reactive Monitoring is the reporting by the Secretariat, other sectors of UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies to the Committee on the state of conservation of specific World Heritage properties that are under threat. To this end, the States Parties shall submit specific reports and impact studies each time exceptional circumstances occur or work is undertaken which may have an impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property or its state of conservation. Reactive Monitoring is also foreseen in reference to properties inscribed, or to be inscribed, on the List of World Heritage in Danger (…). Reactive Monitoring is also foreseen in the procedures for the eventual deletion of properties from the World Heritage List (…)”.
| Theme: | 3.2.3 - Reactive Monitoring |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 170
“When adopting the process of Reactive Monitoring, the Committee was particularly concerned that all possible measures should be taken to prevent the deletion of any property from the List and was ready to offer technical co-operation as far as possible to States Parties in this connection.”| Theme: | 3.2.3 - Reactive Monitoring |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
| Theme: | 3.2.3 - Reactive Monitoring |
| Decision: | 43 COM 7.1 |
Paragraph 192
“The Committee adopted the following procedure for the deletion of properties from the World Heritage List in cases:
a) where the property has deteriorated to the extent that it has lost those characteristics which determined its inclusion in the World Heritage List; and
b) where the intrinsic qualities of a World Heritage site were already threatened at the time of its nomination by human action and where the necessary corrective measures as outlined by the State Party at the time, have not been taken within the time proposed (…)”.
| Theme: | 3.2.5 - Deletion of a World Heritage property from the List |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions
The World Heritage Committee considers it is crucial to ensure the maintenance of ecological connectivity between the property’s component parts, by strengthening and improving measures to ensure consistency and greater functional linkages between component sites of a property and its surrounding, and to develop appropriate measures to minimize the effects of any activity on ecological connectivity and/or ensure its restoration (based on case law on decisions on State of Conservation and Nomination).
| Theme: | 3.5.5 - Biological resource use/modification |
| See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 8B.9 41 COM 7B.37 43 COM 7A.8 43 COM 8B.10 44 COM 7B.175 44 COM 7B.174 44 COM 7B.114 |
The World Heritage Committee encourages States Parties to ensure that no commercial logging can be permitted within the property/to ban all commercial logging (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.5 - Biological resource use/modification |
| See for examples Decisions: | 37 COM 7B.26 38 COM 7A.45 41 COM 7A.19 41 COM 7B.4 41 COM 7B.1 |
| Threats: | Aquaculture Commercial hunting Commercial wild plant collection Crop production Fishing/collecting aquatic resources Forestry /wood production Land conversion Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals Subsistence hunting Subsistence wild plant collection |
The World Heritage Committee requests to undertake research to determine the effects and impact from existing resource use, including fishing activities, grazing and collection of medicinal plants on the OUV of the property and to work with communities and to fully involve local resource users to promote sustainable resource uses and practices (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.5 - Biological resource use/modification |
| See for examples Decisions: | 38 COM 7B.84 38 COM 7B.62 40 COM 7B.85 41 COM 7B.17 41 COM 7B.15 43 COM 7B.8 |
| Threats: | Aquaculture Commercial hunting Commercial wild plant collection Crop production Fishing/collecting aquatic resources Forestry /wood production Land conversion Livestock farming / grazing of domesticated animals Subsistence hunting Subsistence wild plant collection |
Paragraph 90
“For all properties nominated under criteria (vii) - (x), bio-physical processes and landform features should be relatively intact. However, it is recognized that no area is totally pristine and that all natural areas are in a dynamic state, and to some extent involve contact with people. Biological diversity and cultural diversity can be closely linked and interdependent and human activities, including those of traditional societies, local communities and indigenous peoples, often occur in natural areas. These activities may be consistent with the Outstanding Universal Value of the area where they are ecologically sustainable.”
| Theme: | 3.5.8 - Social/cultural uses of heritage |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
| 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 |
Paragraph 119
“World Heritage properties may sustain biological and cultural diversity and provide ecosystem services and other benefits, which may contribute to environmental and cultural sustainability. Properties may support a variety of ongoing and proposed uses that are ecologically and culturally sustainable and which may enhance the quality of life and well-being of communities concerned. The State Party and its partners must ensure their use is equitable and fully respects the Outstanding Universal Value of the property. For some properties, human use would not be appropriate. Legislation, policies and strategies affecting World Heritage properties should ensure the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value, support the wider conservation of natural and cultural heritage, and promote and encourage the effective, inclusive and equitable participation of the communities, indigenous peoples and other stakeholders concerned with the property as necessary conditions to its sustainable protection, conservation, management and presentation.”
| Theme: | 3.5.8 - Social/cultural uses of heritage |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
| 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 |
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.
