Policy Compendium
Paragraph 98
“Legislative and regulatory measures at national and local levels should assure the protection of the property from social, economic and other pressures or changes that might negatively impact the Outstanding Universal Value, including the integrity and/or authenticity of the property. States Parties should also assure the full and effective implementation of such measures.”| Theme: | 2.2.5.2 - Legislative, regulatory and contractual measures for protection |
| 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 requests to ensure the management of a serial property as a unified whole, with an effective and explicit operational coordination between management plans existing for individual component parts of the site and the overall management plan for the property (based on case law on decisions on Nomination).
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| See for examples Decisions: | 40 COM 8B.16 43 COM 8B.38 44 COM 8B.25 44 COM 8B.15 |
Paragraph 108
“Each nominated property should have an appropriate management plan or other documented management system which must specify how the Outstanding Universal Value of a property should be preserved, preferably through participatory means.”
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 109
“The purpose of a management system is to ensure the effective protection of the nominated property for present and future generations.”
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 110
“An effective management system depends on the type, characteristics and needs of the nominated property and its cultural and natural context. Management systems may vary according to different cultural perspectives, the resources available and other factors. They may incorporate traditional practices, existing urban or regional planning instruments, and other planning control mechanisms, both formal and informal. Impact assessments for proposed interventions are essential for all World Heritage properties.”
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 111
“In recognizing the diversity mentioned above, common elements of an effective management system could include:
a) a thorough shared understanding of the property, its universal, national and local values and its socio-ecological context by all stakeholders, including local communities and indigenous peoples;
b) a respect for diversity, equity, gender equality and human rights and the use of inclusive and participatory planning and stakeholder consultation processes;
c) a cycle of planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and feedback;
d) an assessment of the vulnerabilities of the property to social, economic, environmental and other pressures and changes, including disasters and climate change, as well as the monitoring of the impacts of trends and proposed interventions;
e) the development of mechanisms for the involvement and coordination of the various activities between different partners and stakeholders;
f) the allocation of necessary resources;
g) capacity building;
h) an accountable, transparent description of how the management system functions."
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 112
“Effective management involves a cycle of short, medium and long-term actions to protect, conserve and present the nominated property. An integrated approach to planning and management is essential to guide the evolution of properties over time and to ensure maintenance of all aspects of their Outstanding Universal Value. This approach goes beyond the property to include any buffer zone(s), as well as the broader setting. The broader setting may relate to the property’s topography, natural and built environment, and other elements such as infrastructure, land use patterns, spatial organization, and visual relationships. It may also include related social and cultural practices, economic processes and other intangible dimensions of heritage such as perceptions and associations. Management of the broader setting is related to its role in supporting the Outstanding Universal Value. Its effective management may also contribute to sustainable development, through harnessing the reciprocal benefits for heritage and society.”
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 117
“States Parties are responsible for implementing effective management activities for a World Heritage property. States Parties should do so in close collaboration with property managers, the agency with management authority and other partners, local communities and indigenous peoples, rights-holders and stakeholders in property management, by developing, when appropriate, equitable governance arrangements, collaborative management systems and redress mechanisms.”| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 118
“The Committee recommends that States Parties include disaster, climate change and other risk preparedness as an element in their World Heritage site management plans and training strategies.”
| Theme: | 2.2.5.3 - Management systems |
| Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 122
In particular:
a) The Preliminary Assessment provides States Parties with an opportunity for enhanced dialogue with the Advisory Bodies, and it will help to establish the feasibility of a potential nomination and avoid the use of resources in the preparation of nominations that may be unlikely to succeed.
b) The Preliminary Assessment provides guidance on the potential of a site to justify Outstanding Universal Value, including integrity and/or authenticity, and, if information is provided, on the requirements for protection and management. The decision to prepare a full nomination dossier, regardless of the outcome of the Preliminary Assessment, will rest with the concerned State(s) Party(ies).
c) States Parties shall submit their Preliminary Assessment request to the World Heritage Centre according to the timetable set in paragraph 168, and using the standard format provided in Annex 3. The request shall be submitted in English or French, in paper and electronic formats (Word and/or PDF format) and in the required number of printed copies (same as for nomination dossiers): 2 identical copies for cultural and natural sites, and 3 identical copies for mixed sites and cultural landscapes.
d) On receipt of Preliminary Assessment requests from States Parties, the Secretariat will acknowledge receipt, check for completeness (in compliance with Annex 3) and register them. The Secretariat will forward, according to the timetable set in paragraph 168, complete Preliminary Assessment requests to the relevant Advisory Body(ies) for desk review. If necessary, the Advisory Body(ies) will request any additional information from the State(s) Party(ies), which should be submitted to the Secretariat. From the commencement of the Preliminary Assessment, the Advisory Body(ies) will initiate a dialogue with the concerned State(s) Party(ies) to establish a point of contact and agree on the process of exchange. States Parties are encouraged to appoint a technical focal point to ensure that dialogue is effective throughout the process, and to ensure that the conclusions of the Preliminary Assessment are communicated to the relevant stakeholders.
e) The Preliminary Assessment will be undertaken by ICOMOS and IUCN on a joint basis whenever relevant, and will be an independent desk review, which will include consultation with expert reviewers. No mission to the site will be undertaken (see Annex 6). Based on available information, the conclusions of the assessment will include an indication of whether the site may have potential to justify Outstanding Universal Value. If so, specific guidance and advice, in the form of recommendations, will be provided to assist the State(s) Party(ies) in the development of the nomination dossier. The Preliminary Assessment Report by the Advisory Bodies shall be provided to the State(s) Party(ies) via the Secretariat in one of the two working languages of the Convention.
f) The Preliminary Assessment Report by the Advisory Bodies is relevant for up to 5 years. A new Preliminary Assessment is required if a nomination is not submitted by 1 February on the fifth year following the transmission of the Report to the concerned State(s) Party(ies).
g) A State Party may withdraw a Preliminary Assessment request it has submitted, at any time. In such circumstances, any further consideration of a possible nomination will need to be subject to a new request for a Preliminary Assessment.
h) At each session of the World Heritage Committee, the Secretariat will provide a list of Preliminary Assessments requests received and those undertaken, but will not indicate the guidance given by the Advisory Bodies to the concerned State(s) Party(ies) in a completed Preliminary Assessment. However, once a nomination is submitted, the related Preliminary Assessment Report shall be annexed to it.
i) Both Upstream Process and Preliminary Assessment imply guidance at an early stage, prior to the preparation of a nomination, however they are different mechanisms. The Upstream Process is not mandatory. The Preliminary Assessment is a mandatory phase possibly allowing access to the preparation of a nomination dossier. Within an Upstream Process a visit to the site may be possible, while the Preliminary Assessment is carried out exclusively on the basis of a desk review. The Upstream Process may provide general advice, in relation to revision of a Tentative List, while the Preliminary Assessment is undertaken on a single site (whether serial or not) already included on a State Party’s Tentative List. While in general the costs of Upstream Process requests are borne by the requesting State(s) Party(ies), the costs of Preliminary Assessments, being part of the nomination process, are included in the related evaluation process (see also Paragraph 168bis). In terms of sequence, Upstream Process advice should precede the Preliminary Assessment."
| Theme: | 2.4 - Upstream Process |
| Source: | WHC.21/01 Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.21/01 2021) |
| Theme: | 2.4 - Upstream Process |
| Decision: | 41 COM 9A |
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.
