Policy Compendium
| Theme: | 3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger |
| Decision: | 44 COM 7.1 |
Paragraph 9
“When a property inscribed on the World Heritage List is threatened by serious and specific dangers, the Committee considers placing it on the List of World Heritage in Danger. When the Outstanding Universal Value of the property which justified its inscription on the World Heritage List is destroyed, the Committee considers deleting the property from the World Heritage List.”| Theme: | 3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 182
“The Committee may wish to bear in mind the following supplementary factors when considering the inclusion of a cultural or natural property in the List of World Heritage in Danger:
a) Decisions which affect World Heritage properties are taken by Governments after balancing all factors. The advice of the World Heritage Committee can often be decisive if it can be given before the property becomes threatened.
b) Particularly in the case of ascertained danger, the physical or cultural deteriorations to which a property has been subjected should be judged according to the intensity of its effects and analyzed case by case.
c) Above all in the case of potential danger to a property, one should consider that:
i) the threat should be appraised according to the normal evolution of the social and economic framework in which the property is situated;
ii) it is often impossible to assess certain threats such as the threat of armed conflict as to their effect on cultural or natural properties;
iii) some threats are not imminent in nature, but can only be anticipated, such as demographic growth.
d) Finally, in its appraisal the Committee should take into account any cause of unknown or unexpected origin which endangers a cultural or natural property.”
| Theme: | 3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 183
“When considering the inscription of a property on the List of World Heritage in Danger, the Committee shall develop, and adopt, as far as possible, in consultation with the State Party concerned, a Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger, and a programme for corrective measures.”[1][1] In relation to the paragraph 183 of the Operational Guidelines, there are several decisions from different properties related to the desired state of conservation. See for example 31 COM 7A.16, 31 COM 7A.21, 36 COM 7A.34, 36 COM 7B.102, 37 COM 7A.40, 38 COM 7A.23, 39 COM 7A.13, 39 COM 7A.18, 41 COM 7A.19, 41 COM 7A.23.
| Theme: | 3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
“The dynamic nature of living cities [must be recognized]. However, (…) rapid and frequently uncontrolled development is transforming urban areas and their settings, which may cause fragmentation and deterioration to urban heritage with deep impacts on community values, throughout the world”.
Preamble
“In order to support the protection of natural and cultural heritage, emphasis needs to be put on the integration of historic urban area conservation, management and planning strategies into local development processes and urban planning, such as, contemporary architecture and infrastructure development, for which the application of a landscape approach would help maintain urban identity”.
22. “Conservation of the urban heritage should be integrated into general policy planning and practices and those related to the broader urban context. Policies should provide mechanisms for balancing conservation and sustainability in the short and long terms. Special emphasis should be placed on the harmonious, integration of contemporary interventions into the historic urban fabric. In particular, the responsibilities of the different stakeholders are the following:
(a) Member States should integrate urban heritage conservation strategies into national development policies and agendas according to the historic urban landscape approach. Within this framework, local authorities should prepare urban development plans taking into account the area’s values, including the landscape and other heritage values, and features associated therewith;
(b) Public and private stakeholders should cooperate, inter alia, through partnerships to ensure the successful application of the historic urban landscape approach;
(c) International organizations dealing with sustainable development processes should integrate the historic urban landscape approach into their strategies, plans and operations;
(d) National and international non-governmental organizations should participate in developing and disseminating tools and best practices for the implementation of the historic urban landscape approach”.
| Theme: | 3.5.1 - Buildings and development |
| Source: | Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) |
| Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
| Theme: | 3.5.1 - Buildings and development |
| Decision: | 34 COM 7C |
| Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
(…)
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: | 3.5.1 - Buildings and development |
| Decision: | 44 COM 7.2 |
| Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee recommends to develop a comprehensive urban land use plan, which includes provisions for protection mechanisms and regulatory measures to ensure the adequate protection and control of the property and its landscape setting (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.1 - Buildings and development |
| See for examples Decisions: | 34 COM 7A.27 36 COM 7B.61 41 COM 7B.41 |
| Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee recommends to put in place appropriate protection and planning measures and to develop an integrated urban conservation and development tool, in the urban settlement and its wider context, in order to address development pressures, to protect the urban landscape and prevent the construction of new buildings that could have a visual impact (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.1 - Buildings and development |
| See for examples Decisions: | 32 COM 7B.84 32 COM 7B.72 33 COM 7B.67 36 COM 7B.88 37 COM 7B.71 40 COM 7B.49 41 COM 7 41 COM 7B.53 41 COM 7B.42 41 COM 7B.40 |
| Threats: | Commercial development Housing Industrial areas Interpretative and visitation facilities Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure |
| Theme: | 3.5.3 - Utilities or service infrastructure |
| Decision: | 40 COM 7 |
| Threats: | Localised utilities Major linear utilities Non-renewable energy facilities Renewable energy facilities Water infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee recommends to strengthen the protection of the immediate and wider setting of properties for addressing the impact of wind turbines, and to identify a wind turbine exclusion zone, based on the potential visual impact on the components of the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.3 - Utilities or service infrastructure |
| See for examples Decisions: | 32 COM 7B.118 34 COM 7B.83 36 COM 7B.74 41 COM 7B.45 41 COM 8B.19 |
| Threats: | Localised utilities Major linear utilities Non-renewable energy facilities Renewable energy facilities Water infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee requests to conduct an adequate environmental impact study for the power transmission lines, before any decision is taken (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.3 - Utilities or service infrastructure |
| See for examples Decisions: | 21 BUR IVB.33 25 BUR V.126-127 37 COM 7B.79 38 COM 7B.59 |
| Threats: | Localised utilities Major linear utilities Non-renewable energy facilities Renewable energy facilities Water infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee recommends to enhance the regulation and monitoring of pollution, and to create management plans that consider options to address and to put in place adequate measures to mitigate the impact associated to the pollution, and its potential impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, including the control of sources of pollution affecting the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.4 - Pollution |
| See for examples Decisions: | 31 COM 7B.31 31 COM 7B.4 33 COM 7B.28 35 COM 7B.23 36 COM 7B.22 41 COM 7B.25 |
| Threats: | Air pollution Ground water pollution Input of excess energy Pollution of marine waters Solid waste Surface water pollution |
18. "[The World Heritage Committee] notes with significant concern that World Heritage properties are increasingly threatened by extractive industries (…), once again urges all States Parties to the Convention and leading industry stakeholders to respect the "No-go" commitment by not permitting extractive activities within World Heritage properties, and by making every effort to ensure that extractives companies located in their territory cause no damage to World Heritage properties, in line with Article 6 of the Convention."
| Theme: | 3.5.6 - Physical resource extraction |
| Decision: | 37 COM 7 40 COM 7 |
| Threats: | Mining Oil and gas Quarrying Water (extraction) |
The World Heritage Committee requests States Parties not to explore or mine in World Heritage properties, in line with the Committee’s established position that mineral exploration and mining are incompatible with World Heritage status and the international policy statement of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) of not undertaking these activities in World Heritage properties (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.6 - Physical resource extraction |
| See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7B.22 37 COM 7B.8 40 COM 7B.104 41 COM 7A.19 |
| Threats: | Mining Oil and gas Quarrying Water (extraction) |
The World Heritage Committee reiterates that mining activities and oil and gas exploration and exploitation are incompatible with World Heritage status (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.6 - Physical resource extraction |
| See for examples Decisions: | 38 COM 7B.92 38 COM 7B.80 40 COM 7B.85 40 COM 7B.71 |
| Threats: | Mining Oil and gas Quarrying Water (extraction) |
When mining or other type of exploitation is foreseen, the World Heritage Committee requests to get an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, meeting international standards, before any commencement of exploitation at the property and adjacent to the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
| Theme: | 3.5.6 - Physical resource extraction |
| See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7B.22 36 COM 7B.1 38 COM 7B.92 |
| Threats: | Mining Oil and gas Quarrying Water (extraction) |
| Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
| Source: | Policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention (WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13) |
7. “If undertaken responsibly, tourism can be a driver for preservation and conservation of cultural and natural heritage and a vehicle for sustainable development. But if unplanned or not properly managed, tourism can be socially, culturally and economically disruptive, and have a devastating effect on fragile environments and local communities”.
18. “World Heritage and tourism stakeholders share responsibility for conservation of our common cultural and natural heritage of Outstanding Universal Value and for sustainable development through appropriate tourism management”.
| Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
| Source: | WHC-12/36.COM/5E World Heritage Tourism Programme |
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 |
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.
