Policy Compendium

54. "[The World Heritage Committee] encourages States Parties to make full use of such Earth Observation technologies for the early detection of activities potentially harmful to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of World Heritage properties, such as deforestation, mining, illegal fisheries, agricultural encroachment, etc. and to better understand trends and respond appropriately."

9. "[The World Heritage Committee] Invites the Advisory Bodies to engage in effective and constructive dialogue with States Parties in the preparation of Tentative Lists, in the nomination process, including before the publication of recommendations, and post inscription (including monitoring missions), with the aim of achieving more effective credibility, transparency and better implementation of the Convention and Sustainable Development Goals."

Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions

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).

Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions

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).

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 (…)”.

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.”

14. "[The World Heritage Committee] Recognizes that the selection of the state of conservation reports to be discussed by the Committee during its sessions should be based on clear and objective criteria, including the level of threat to the property, rather than being based on representativity."

"7. [The World Heritage Committee considers] that the inscription of a property on the List of World Heritage in Danger aims to marshal international support to help the State Party effectively address the challenges faced by the property by engaging with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to develop a program of corrective measures to achieve the desired state of conservation for the property, as provided for under Paragraph 183 of the Operational Guidelines; and [notes] that inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger also alerts the State Party about the international community’s concern on the state of conservation of the property, provides a timely reminder of obligations that arise under the World Heritage Convention, highlights threats to the attributes of a property which contribute to its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and, importantly, initiates a process and pathway to address those threats, including the availability of additional funding."

 

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.”

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.”

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.

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 (…)”.

"28. [The World Heritage Committee]  (r)equests States Parties to implement best practice fire management strategies to ensure the protection and management of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) including, where appropriate, to:
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."

7. “(…)

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".

16. “In the face of increasing disaster risks and the impact of climate change, States Parties should recognise that World Heritage represents both an asset to be protected and a resource to strengthen the ability of communities and their properties to resist, absorb, and recover from the effects of a hazard. In line with disaster risks and climate change multilateral agreements, States Parties should:

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”.

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;"

5. "[The World Heritage Committee requests States Parties] to make every endeavour to take into consideration disaster risks, including from human-induced hazards, in the management plans and systems for the World Heritage properties located in their territories."

24. "[The World Heritage Committee] also recalls the need for all States Parties to continue, and where necessary to strengthen all efforts to build resilience of World Heritage properties to Climate Change, including by further reducing to the greatest extent possible all other pressures and threats, and by developing and implementing climate adaptation strategies for properties at risk of Climate Change impacts."

24. "[The World Heritage Committee] encourages States Parties and other stakeholders to further strengthen international cooperation aiming at mitigating impacts of major natural disasters affecting World Heritage properties and reducing vulnerabilities on lives, properties and livelihoods."

Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions

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).