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 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) |
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) |
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) |
a) Prepare site-level fire vulnerability and risk assessments, mitigation, Risk Preparedness, response and recovery plans in the event of potential severe fire impacts on heritage values,
b) Incorporate fire research, monitoring of impact, emergency response and mitigation and preparedness measures into management decisions,
c) Work with stakeholders to raise awareness on fire risks among communities and build greater capacity to respond and recover following fires,
d) Consider customised approaches and strategies that reflect the characteristics and circumstances of naturally and anthropogenically generated fires,
e) Explore the potential of new technologies for application in fire managing strategies, including monitoring, and firefighting systems, that will not have negative impact on OUV of the properties,
f) Take strong actions to address human-induced climate change in line with global United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) commitments."
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Decision: | 44 COM 7.2 |
a) Cultural and natural heritage, with their related technologies, practices, skills, knowledge systems and ecosystem’s goods and services can play an important positive role in reducing risks from disasters at all phases of the process (readiness, response and recovery), and hence in contributing to sustainable development in general”.
b) The key to an effective reduction of risks from disasters is advance planning and the building of a culture of prevention”.
c) In developing plans for reducing risks at World Heritage properties it is essential to give adequate consideration to cultural diversity, age, vulnerable groups and gender perspective”.
d) Property occupants and users, and concerned communities in general, should be always involved in planning for disaster risk reduction”.
e) The protection of the Outstanding Universal Value and the integrity and authenticity of World Heritage properties from disasters implies consideration for the associated intangible aspects and movable items that contribute directly to its heritage significance.
(…).9. The five objectives [of the Strategy for Reducing Risks from Disaster at World Heritage Properties] are the following:
a) Strengthen support within relevant global, regional, national and local institutions for reducing risks at World Heritage properties;
b) Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of disaster prevention at World Heritage properties;
c) Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks at World Heritage properties;
d) Reduce underlying risk factors at World Heritage properties;
e) Strengthen disaster risk preparedness at World Heritage properties for effective response at all levels".
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Source: | WHC-07/31.COM/7.2 Issues related to the state of conservation of World Heritage properties: Strategy for Reducing Risks from Disasters at World Heritage properties |
i. Recognise and promote – within conservation and management strategies – the inherent potential of World Heritage properties for reducing disaster risks and adapting to climate change, through associated ecosystem services, traditional knowledge and practices and strengthened social cohesion.
ii. Reduce the vulnerability of World Heritage properties and their settings as well as promote the social and economic resilience of local and associated communities to disaster and climate change through structural and non-structural measures, including public awareness-raising, training and education. Structural measures, in particular, should not adversely affect the OUV of World Heritage properties;
iii. Enhance preparedness for effective response and ‘building-back-better’ in post-disaster recovery strategies within management systems and conservation practice for World Heritage properties”.
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks 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) |
16. "[The World Heritage Committee] urges States Parties to include risk mitigation measures in the management plans of World Heritage properties to address the potential effects of conflicts or disasters on their integrity;"
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Decision: | 41 COM 7 |
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Decision: | 36 COM 7C |
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Decision: | 41 COM 7 |
Threats: | Changes to oceanic waters Desertification Drought Flooding Other climate change impacts Storms Temperature change |
Theme: | 3.4 - Disaster risks management |
Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
“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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
5. "[The World Heritage Committee] also noting that tourism development in and around World Heritage properties is a key issue for their management, strongly encourages States Parties to ensure sustainable planning and management of tourism at World Heritage properties and to contribute to the implementation of the World Heritage Centre’s World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 38 COM 7 |
46. "[The World Heritage Committee] requests States Parties to develop Visitor Management Plans that assess appropriate carrying capacity of properties for visitors and address the issue of unregulated tourism."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 42 COM 7 |
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 |
11. Noting that the protection of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) must be a central objective for all World Heritage properties, requests States Parties to develop visitor management plans and strategies that address the seasonality of tourism (smoothing visitor numbers over time and spreading visitors across sites), encourage longer more in-depth experiences promoting tourism products and services that reflect natural and cultural values, and limit access and activities to improve visitor flows and experiences, while reducing pressures on the attributes which underpin OUV."
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
Decision: | 43 COM 7.3 |
At sites with a high tourism pressure, the World Heritage Committee requests States Parties to put in place all necessary strategic, planning and management frameworks as well as legal regulations for cruise ship tourism, including identification of the sustainable carrying capacity of the site and an analysis of the impact on the World Heritage property by cruise ships (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
See for examples Decisions: | 31 COM 7B.24 38 COM 7B.27 40 COM 7B.52 40 COM 7B.50 |
The World Heritage Committee recommends States Parties to develop a comprehensive tourism management plan or a sustainable tourism strategy, including a set of measures to address the tourism pressure on the site (based on Case law on decisions on the State of Conservation).
Theme: | 3.6 - Tourism and visitor management |
See for examples Decisions: | 35 COM 7B.17 36 COM 7B.78 36 COM 7B.17 37 COM 7B.19 38 COM 7B.92 38 COM 7B.27 39 COM 7B.61 40 COM 7B.81 40 COM 7B.74 40 COM 7B.50 |
2. “In the current context of changing demographics and climate, growing inequalities, diminishing resources, and growing threats to heritage, the need has become apparent to view conservation objectives, (…) with a broader range of economic, social and environmental values and needs encompassed in the sustainable development concept”.
4. “In addition to protecting the OUV of World Heritage properties, States Parties should, (…) recognise and promote the properties' inherent potential to contribute to all dimensions of sustainable development and work to harness the collective benefits for society, also by ensuring that their conservation and management strategies are aligned with broader sustainable development objectives. In this process, the properties’ OUV should not be compromised”.
5. “The integration of a sustainable development perspective into the World Heritage Convention will enable all stakeholders involved in its implementation, in particular at national level, to act with social responsibility (…)”.
6. “States Parties should recognise, by appropriate means, that World Heritage conservation and management strategies that incorporate a sustainable development perspective embrace not only the protection of the OUV, but also the wellbeing of present and future generations”.
7. (…) the overarching principles are (…):
- “Human Rights - The human rights embedded in the UN Charter and the range of broadly ratified human rights instruments reflect fundamental values that underpin the very possibility for dignity, peace and sustainable development. In implementing the World Heritage Convention, it is therefore essential to respect, protect and promote these environmental, social, economic, and cultural rights.
- Equality: The reduction of inequalities in all societies is essential to a vision of inclusive sustainable development. The conservation and management of World Heritage properties should therefore contribute to reducing inequalities, as well as its structural causes, including discrimination and exclusion.
- Sustainability, through a long-term perspective: Sustainability, broadly defined, is inherent to the spirit of the World Heritage Convention. It should serve as a fundamental principle for all aspects of development and for all societies. In the context of the World Heritage Convention, this means applying a long-term perspective to all processes of decision-making within World Heritage properties, with a view to fostering intergenerational equity, justice, and a world fit for present and future generations”.
8. “States Parties should (…) recognize the close links and interdependence of biological diversity and local cultures within the socio-ecological systems of many World Heritage properties”.
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”.
13. “The role of World Heritage properties as a guarantee of sustainable development needs to be strengthened. Their full potential to contribute to sustainable development needs to be harnessed”.
14. “The World Heritage Convention promotes sustainable development, and in particular environmental sustainability, by valuing and conserving places of outstanding natural heritage value, containing exceptional biodiversity, geodiversity or other exceptional natural features, which are essential for human well-being. A concern for environmental sustainability, however, should equally apply to cultural and mixed World Heritage properties, including cultural landscapes. In implementing the Convention, States Parties should therefore promote environmental sustainability more generally to all World Heritage properties to ensure policy coherence and mutual supportiveness with other multilateral environmental agreements. This involves a responsible interaction with the environment in both cultural and natural properties, to avoid depletion or degradation of natural resources, ensuring long-term environmental quality and the strengthening of resilience to disasters and climate change”.
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 (…)”.
24. “World Heritage properties, as cultural and natural heritage in general, offer great potential to alleviate poverty and enhance sustainable livelihoods of local communities, including those of marginalized populations. (…) The Convention should therefore contribute to promoting sustainable forms of inclusive and equitable economic development, productive and even employment and income-generating activities for all, while fully respecting the OUV of World Heritage properties”.
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Source: | Policy for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention (WHC-15/20.GA/INF.13) |
“The principle of sustainable development provides for the preservation of existing resources, the active protection of urban heritage and its sustainable management is a condition sine qua non of development”.
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Source: | Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) |
Paragraph 6
“(…) The protection and conservation of the natural and cultural heritage are a significant contribution to sustainable development.”Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Source: | OG Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (WHC.19/01 - 10 July 2019) |
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Decision: | 41 COM 5C |
37. "Recalling that the World Heritage Convention explicitly links the concepts of cultural and natural heritage, highlights the importance of promoting integrated approaches that strengthen holistic governance, improve conservation outcomes and contribute to sustainable development;
38. [The World Heritage Committee] notes with appreciation the growing interest and efforts by the States Parties and heritage practitioners to develop and apply integrated approaches to conservation of natural and cultural heritage, and encourages the States Parties, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, in cooperation with universities and other relevant actors, to continue and expand these efforts, in accordance with the Policy Document for the integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the Convention (2015)."
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Decision: | 41 COM 7 |
4. "[The World Heritage Committee] (...) requests the States Parties to take a systematic and holistic approach to mainstreaming the WH-SDP [(Policy Document for the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention)] into their national and local policies, processes, and initiatives related to the implementation of the Convention and to development in and around World Heritage properties."
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Decision: | 43 COM 5C |
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Decision: | 43 COM 5C |
6. Further recognizes the need to employ innovative and transformative solutions for reconciling World Heritage and Sustainable Development that will take into account the nature, complexity and specificity of socio-economic constraints that these less developed countries continue to face;
(...)
11. Further calls upon African States Parties to focus their development efforts to benefit local communities, including them in the decision-making, and building on their knowledge and needs with progressive and proactive conservation of natural and cultural heritage; and to create enabling environments for innovative solutions inclusive of green and blue economies while progressing towards other SDGs."
Theme: | 3.7 - Sustainable development |
Decision: | 43 COM 5D |
3.2.2 - Periodic Reporting
3.2.4 - List of World Heritage in Danger
3.2.5 - Deletion of a World Heritage property from the ...
3.4 - Disaster risks management
3.5.1 - Buildings and development
3.5.2 - Transportation infrastructure
3.5.9 - Other human activities
3.5.12 - Invasive/alien species or hyper-abundant ...
3.6 - Tourism and visitor management
3.7 - Sustainable development
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.