Policy Compendium
Paragraph 86
“In relation to authenticity, the reconstruction of archaeological remains or historic buildings or districts is justifiable only in exceptional circumstances. Reconstruction is acceptable only on the basis of complete and detailed documentation and to no extent on conjecture.”Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
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: |
3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties 3.2.1 - General |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Paragraph 97
“All properties inscribed on the World Heritage List must have adequate long-term legislative, regulatory, institutional and/or traditional protection and management to ensure their safeguarding. This protection should include adequately delineated boundaries. Similarly States Parties should demonstrate adequate protection at the national, regional, municipal, and/or traditional level for the nominated property. They should append appropriate texts to the nomination with a clear explanation of the way this protection operates to protect the property.”Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
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: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
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: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
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: |
3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties 3.3 - Impact assessments |
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: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
9. “All dimensions of sustainable development should apply to natural, cultural and mixed properties in their diversity. These dimensions are interdependent and mutually reinforcing, with none having predominance over another and each being equally necessary. States Parties should therefore review and reinforce governance frameworks within management systems of World Heritage properties in order to achieve the appropriate balance, integration and harmonization between the protection of OUV and the pursuit of sustainable development objectives. This will include the full respect and participation of all stakeholders and rights holders, including indigenous peoples and local communities, the setting up of effective inter-institutional coordination mechanisms and provisions for the systematic assessment of environmental, social, and economic impacts of all proposed developments, as well as effective monitoring through continuity in data collection against agreed indicators”.
15. “States Parties should ensure that biological and cultural diversity, as well as ecosystem services and benefits for people that contribute to environmental sustainability, are protected and enhanced within World Heritage properties, their buffer zones and their wider settings. To this end, States Parties should:
i. Integrate consideration for biological and cultural diversity as well as ecosystem services and benefits within the conservation and management of all World Heritage properties, including mixed and cultural ones,
ii. Avoid, and if not possible mitigate, all negative impacts on the environment and cultural diversity when conserving and managing World Heritage properties and their wider settings. This can be achieved by promoting environmental, social and cultural impact assessment tools when undertaking planning in sectors such as urban development, transport, infrastructure, mining and waste management - as well as by applying sustainable consumption and production patterns and promoting the use of renewable energy sources”.
25. “The management and conservation of World Heritage properties should contribute to fostering inclusive local economic development and enhancing livelihoods, compatibly with the protection of their OUV”.
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | Policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention (WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13) |
C. 4) "Apply the Ecosystem Approach
(…)
18. a) Promote integration of the ecosystem approach principles into all stages of planning and management of World Heritage sites."
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Source: | WHC-06/30.COM/INF.6A The World Heritage Centre's Natural Heritage Strategy |
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Decision: | 39 COM 7 |
23. [The World Heritage Committee,] noting with concern that the lack of an integrated management approach is reported to cause challenges to the coordination of management and decision making processes of properties where different authorities are involved, in particular in the cases of mixed, serial, and transboundary properties, urges States Parties to establish appropriate mechanisms in order to facilitate a coordinated approach to the management of all properties, in line with the requirements of the Operational Guidelines as laid out in Paragraphs 112, 114, and 135, and encourages States Parties with contiguous natural properties on either side of their international borders, which are not listed as transboundary properties, to establish appropriate mechanisms for cooperation between their respective management authorities and ministries;
24. Also encourages States Parties to promote recognition and awareness across all relevant national and regional agencies of the World Heritage status of the properties on their territory, and to develop mechanisms to ensure consideration of impacts on Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) in the decision making processes of relevant ministries, before permits are issued for developments that could negatively impact the OUV."
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Decision: | 40 COM 7 |
Threats: | Financial resources Governance High impact research / monitoring activities Human resources Legal framework Low impact research / monitoring activities Management activities Management systems/ management plan |
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
Decision: | 41 COM 7 |
The World Heritage Committee recommends the States Parties to develop a long-term strategy for the sustainable financing of the property, and to ensure adequate human, material and financial resources to support the effective management (based on Case law on decisions on Nominations).
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
See for examples Decisions: | 40 COM 8B.6 41 COM 8B.31 41 COM 8B.11 41 COM 8B.9 41 COM 8B.5 41 COM 8B.3 |
The World Heritage Committee recommends the States Parties to improve institutional coordination, including international coordination, between the different agents in charge of the management of transnational, transboundary and/or serial properties in order to avoid potential negative impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property (based on Case law on decisions on Nominations).
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
See for examples Decisions: | 40 COM 8B.9 41 COM 8B.21 41 COM 8B.7 41 COM 8B.3 |
The World Heritage Committee requests the States Parties to establish the Outstanding Universal Value of the property as a clearly defined and central element within the protection and management system for the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
See for examples Decisions: | 34 COM 7A.27 36 COM 7B.74 36 COM 7B.8 41 COM 7B.47 |
States Parties are responsible for elaborating a comprehensive and integrated site management plan and to secur[ing] the necessary resources for its full implementation (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.1 - Protection, conservation and management of World Heritage properties |
See for examples Decisions: | 32 COM 7B.70 33 COM 7B.116 34 COM 7A.27 35 COM 7B.131 36 COM 7B.74 40 COM 7B.50 41 COM 7A.42 |
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 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 202
“Periodic Reporting is important for more effective long term conservation of the properties inscribed, as well as to strengthen the credibility of the implementation of the Convention. It is also an important tool for assessing the implementation by States Parties and World Heritage properties of policies adopted by the World Heritage Committee and the General Assembly.”
Theme: | 3.2.2 - Periodic Reporting |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
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 |
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) |
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 |
9. "(…) appropriate balance, integration and harmonization between the protection of OUV and the pursuit of sustainable development objectives will include (…) provisions for the systematic assessment of environmental, social, and economic impacts of all proposed developments, as well as effective monitoring through continuity in data collection against agreed indicators."
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Source: | Policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention (WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13) |
Paragraph 172
“The World Heritage Committee invites the States Parties to the Convention to inform the Committee, through the Secretariat, of their intention to undertake or to authorize in an area protected under the Convention major restorations or new constructions which may affect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property. Notice should be given as soon as possible (…) and before making any decisions that would be difficult to reverse, so that the Committee may assist in seeking appropriate solutions to ensure that the Outstanding Universal Value of the property is fully preserved.”
Theme: | 3.3 - Impact assessments |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
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 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 |
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 |
“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 |
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 |
Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions
The World Heritage Committee requests to develop effective traffic management studies and elaborate measures and strategies, including monitoring, when the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) could be affected by traffic (based on case law on decisions on the State of Conservation and Nomination).
Theme: | 3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure |
See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7B.67 38 COM 7B.28 39 COM 7A.48 41 COM 7B.94 42 COM 7B.52 43 COM 7B.45 43 COM 8B.32 44 COM 7B.127 44 COM 7B.37 44 COM 8B.5 |
25. "[The World Heritage Committee] notes with concern that the number of cases of ground transport infrastructure having potential impact on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of World Heritage properties is continuing to grow, and calls upon States Parties to carry out Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) early in the process of transportation planning to allow for potential impacts of the OUV, including those resulting from foreseeable associated future developments, to be identified prior to the development of specific projects;
26. Encourages States Parties to carry out Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Heritage Impact Assessments (HIA) on ground transport projects, once they are designed, with multiple options to ensure that transportation needs can be met with minimal impacts on the OUV of World Heritage properties."
Theme: | 3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure |
Decision: | 40 COM 7 |
Threats: | Air transport infrastructure Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure Marine transport infrastructure Underground transport infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee requests the State Party to submit, in accordance to Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, details about any cable car project, including design, technical specifications and precise location of the route, in relation to the inscribed property, together with a HIA and an EIA, well before any irrevocable decisions are taken about the construction of the cable car (based on case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure |
See for examples Decisions: | 37 COM 7B.102 38 COM 7B.77 38 COM 7B.45 40 COM 7B.91 42 COM 7B.26 |
Threats: | Air transport infrastructure Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure Marine transport infrastructure Underground transport infrastructure |
The World Heritage Committee requests Heritage Impact Assessments and Environmental Impact Assessments of all significant development proposals in the property and of any major transportation infrastructure project, before approval for the schemes is granted and prior to making any decisions that would be difficult to reverse, including definitive location and plans for construction, in order to identify any adverse impacts on the property and ways to mitigate these impacts, and to submit the HIA and the EIA to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure |
See for examples Decisions: | 32 COM 7B.122 36 COM 7B.100 36 COM 7B.80 37 COM 7B.65 38 COM 7B.62 39 COM 7B.91 40 COM 7B.55 41 COM 7B.69 41 COM 7B.59 41 COM 7B.31 |
Threats: | Air transport infrastructure Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure Marine transport infrastructure Underground transport 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 |
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 |
Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions
The World Heritage Committee requests to strengthen the efforts and provide means to remove, combat, neutralize and control the action and impact of armed groups in the property (based on case law on decisions on State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7A.7 36 COM 7A.5 38 COM 7A.37 39 COM 7A.6 42 COM 7A.52 42 COM 7A.51 |
Threats: | Military training Terrorism War |
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
Decision: | 38 COM 7 |
Threats: | Civil unrest Deliberate destruction of heritage Illegal activities Military training Terrorism War |
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
Decision: | 41 COM 7 |
20. "[The World Heritage Committee] expresses its utmost concern about the impacts of conflicts causing an escalation of the already severe poaching crisis in central Africa, as armed groups are financing their activities through illegal wildlife trade, which is having a severe impact on wildlife populations, thereby degrading the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of natural World Heritage properties;"
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
Threats: | Civil unrest Deliberate destruction of heritage Illegal activities Military training Terrorism War |
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
Decision: | 43 COM 7.2 |
The World Heritage Committee requests States Parties to take all measures possible to halt poaching in the property (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
See for examples Decisions: | 33 COM 7B.11 38 COM 7A.45 40 COM 7A.37 |
Threats: | Civil unrest Deliberate destruction of heritage Illegal activities Military training Terrorism War |
The World Heritage Committee requests States Parties to promote traditional land management practices [and] reiterates its appeal to all Member States of UNESCO to cooperate in the fight against the illicit trade in wildlife and its products, including through the implementation of the CITES, and with the full engagement of transit and destination countries (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.5.9 - Other human activities |
See for examples Decisions: | 32 COM 7B.41 35 COM 7B.9 38 COM 7B.14 40 COM 7B.86 |
Threats: | Civil unrest Deliberate destruction of heritage Illegal activities Military training Terrorism War |
“[The World Heritage Committee] notes with concern the significant and continued threat posed by invasive alien species to natural World Heritage properties, [and] strongly encourages States Parties to develop adequately resourced strategies to eradicate invasive species that emphasize prevention and early warning and rapid response in World Heritage properties, and also calls on the international community to support invasive species eradication campaigns in affected properties.”
Theme: | 3.5.12 - Invasive/alien species or hyper-abundant species |
Decision: | 39 COM 7 41 COM 7 |
Threats: | Hyper-abundant species Invasive / alien freshwater species Invasive / alien marine species Invasive/alien terrestrial species Modified genetic material Translocated species |
3.2.1 - General
3.2.2 - Periodic Reporting
3.2.3 - Reactive Monitoring
3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger
3.3 - Impact assessments
3.5.1 - Buildings and development
3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure
3.5.3 - Utilities or service infrastructure
3.5.4 - Pollution
3.5.5 - Biological resource use/modification
3.5.9 - Other human activities
3.5.12 - Invasive/alien species or hyper-abundant ...
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.