Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Capacity Building
Credibility of the World Heritage ...
Inscriptions on the World Heritage ...
International Assistance
List of World Heritage in Danger
Operational Guidelines
Outstanding Universal Value
Periodic Reporting
Reinforced Monitoring
Tentative Lists
Working methods and tools
World Heritage Convention

2029 27 GA
2027 26 GA
2025 25 GA
2025 47 COM
2024 46 COM
2023 24 GA
2023 45 COM
2023 18 EXT.COM
2022 17 EXT.COM
2021 16 EXT.COM
2021 23 GA
2021 44 COM
2021 15 EXT.COM
2020 14 EXT.COM
2019 13 EXT.COM
2019 22 GA
2019 43 COM
2018 42 COM
2017 12 EXT.COM
2017 21 GA
2017 41 COM
2016 40 COM
2015 11 EXT.COM
2015 20 GA
2015 39 COM
2014 1 EXT.GA
2014 38 COM
2013 19 GA
2013 37 COM
2012 36 COM
2011 10 EXT.COM
2011 18 GA
2011 35 COM
2010 34 COM
2010 9 EXT.COM
2009 17 GA
2009 33 COM
2008 32 COM
2007 16 GA
2007 8 EXT.COM
2007 31 COM
2006 30 COM
2005 15 GA
2005 29 COM
2005 29 BUR
2004 7 EXT.COM
2004 7 EXT.BUR
2004 28 COM
2004 28 BUR
2003 14 GA
2003 27 COM
2003 27 BUR
2003 6 EXT.COM
2002 26 COM
2002 26 BUR
2001 25 COM
2001 25 EXT.BUR
2001 5 EXT.COM
2001 13 GA
2001 25 BUR
2000 24 COM
2000 24 EXT.BUR
2000 24 BUR(SPE)
2000 24 BUR
1999 23 COM
1999 23 EXT.BUR
1999 4 EXT.COM
1999 12 GA
1999 3 EXT.COM
1999 23 BUR
1998 22 COM
1998 22 EXT.BUR
1998 22 BUR
1997 21 COM
1997 21 EXT.BUR
1997 2 EXT.COM
1997 11 GA
1997 21 BUR
1996 20 COM
1996 20 EXT.BUR
1996 20 BUR
1995 19 COM
1995 19 EXT.BUR
1995 10 GA
1995 19 BUR
1994 18 COM
1994 18 EXT.BUR
1994 18 BUR
1993 17 COM
1993 17 EXT.BUR
1993 9 GA
1993 17 BUR
1992 16 COM
1992 16 BUR
1991 15 COM
1991 8 GA
1991 15 BUR
1990 14 COM
1990 14 BUR
1989 13 COM
1989 7 GA
1989 13 BUR
1988 12 COM
1988 12 BUR
1987 11 COM
1987 6 GA
1987 11 BUR
1986 10 COM
1986 10 BUR
1985 9 COM
1985 5 GA
1985 9 BUR
1984 8 COM
1984 8 BUR
1983 7 COM
1983 4 GA
1983 7 BUR
1982 6 COM
1982 6 BUR
1981 5 COM
1981 1 EXT.COM
1981 5 BUR
1980 3 GA
1980 4 COM
1980 4 BUR
1979 3 COM
1979 3 BUR
1979 2 BUR
1978 2 GA
1978 2 COM
1978 1 BUR
1977 1 COM
1976 1 GA
81 Decisions
0 Resolutions
Session: 23BUR 1999close
By Year
The Bureau noted that state of conservation reports of three of the fifteen natural heritage properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, namely Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria), the Everglades National Park and Yellowstone National Park (United States of America) are due by 15 September 1999 and will be submitted to the twenty-third ordinary session of the Committee, to be convened from 29 November to 4 December 1999 in Marrakesh, Morocco. The Bureau examined the state of conservation reports on the following twelve natural heritage sites included in the List of World ...
The Bureau recalled that uncontrolled poaching by armed groups had led to the death of four members of the Park staff in 1997, decimated more than 80% of the Park's wildlife populations and brought tourism to a halt. The Committee, at its twenty-first session (Naples, 1997), had welcomed the State Party’s intention to assign site management responsibilities to a private Foundation and had requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the Government and the Foundation to prepare a detailed state of conservation report and a rehabilitation plan for the site. The Bureau noted with concern ...
The Committee and the Bureau have expressed serious concerns with regard to the state of conservation of these four sites at their annual sessions as the eastern parts of the country have become increasingly engulfed in war since 1994. Hopes for peace in the latter half of 1998 were short-lived as renewed fighting spread to all parts of eastern DRC. The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998), had requested the Centre and IUCN to consult with ICCN (Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature) and international conservation NGOs to estimate the cost ...
The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998) was informed that the construction of the Guamote-Macos road was the main threat to this Park and an EIA had not been conducted. Construction has been slow but very destructive of the environment. Only a small section of the road is inside the World Heritage site; the remainder of the road forms the Park’s southern boundary. The Committee noted that, in the latter half of 1998, economic constraints had led to a halt in road construction activities and some positive developments with regard to the state of ...
The Bureau recalled that the regional authorities in Bahir Dar, where this site is located, disagreed with the Committee’s decision to include this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1996. Since then the Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Ethiopia, UNESCO Office in Addis Ababa and the Centre have continued to inform the Bahir Dar authorities on the meaning and implications of the Committee’s decision to include Simen National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger. At its last session (Kyoto, 1998), the Committee noted that the responsibilities for ...
The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998), had observed that despite a 2-3 year effort, the establishment of a foundation or a trust fund for the conservation of Mt. Nimba appeared increasingly unlikely to succeed in the near future. The Committee had noted that the Permanent Executive Secretary of the MAB National Committee for Guinea had informed the Centre that the Nimba Mining Company (NIMCO) had been dissolved by the Government and no other enterprise had been created to replace it. Agreeing with IUCN’s observation that information on the state ...
The Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998), had recalled that the State Party is in the process of implementing an eleven-point corrective action plan for this site since 1996. A management plan for the site is being elaborated as part of a project financed by GTZ-KFW (Germany) and supported by a contribution of US$ 30,000 from the Fund. The Committee learned that a proposed hydroelectric development project (Patuca II), to be implemented near the Reserve, could open new access roads to the Reserve, reduce downstream water flow and quality, and result in the loss of scenic and ...
The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session (Kyoto, 1998), had learnt that the implementation of the rehabilitation plan was progressing satisfactorily. The Committee also learned that the construction of ranger posts and staff housing using the second instalment of US$ 90,000 had been delayed due to adverse climatic conditions in the area throughout 1998. The Committee was informed that, while security conditions in and around Manas had improved, the threat of insurgency still prevailed and that militants often traversed the Sanctuary. Nevertheless, the Committee noted ...
The Bureau recalled that the Committee had recommended (Naples, 1997), a mission to this site to evaluate the state of conservation and to determine whether the site could be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger. At its last session (Kyoto, 1998), the Committee had noted the findings of the Centre/State Party/IUCN site mission (September-October 1998), and of previous missions of IUCN-Niger which indicated that the numbers of most wildlife species are recovering. The flora, except in some valleys where they seem to be over-used by local people, is mostly intact. Species like ...
The Bureau recalled that, at its last session (June 1998), while being concerned about the feasibility of the effective rehabilitation of Ichkeul, it had urged the State Party to take all necessary measures to ensure rapid and effective implementation of the rehabilitation programme for Ichkeul. The Bureau had also recommended an expert mission to the site. The mission was intended to give due consideration to the possibility for developing an improved rehabilitation programme for Ichkeul to retain its status as a World Heritage site and to allow the State Party sufficient time for the ...
The Bureau, having examined the state of conservation report of the site and upon considering the additional information provided by the Director of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and members of the Bureau, commended the exemplary work being carried out by the Authority for the Protection of the Site and Development of the Region of Angkor (APSARA) and the International Co-ordination Committee for the Safeguarding and Development of the Historic Area of Angkor (ICC).  The Bureau noted that some one hundred on-going projects are being implemented by more than a dozen countries and ...
Sites: Angkor
The Bureau took note of the progress made in the preparation of the five-year conservation plan.  It will evaluate the progress after two years in order to assess if it can recommend the Committee to delete the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger.  The Bureau recommended that the Committee at its twenty-third session, endorse this procedure.  Moreover, the Bureau invited the Omani authorities to increase their financial contribution for the missions to enable the team of experts to continue assisting the national authorities at the site in implementing the ...
Sites: Bahla Fort
ICOMOS presented a report on the conditions of the cultural World Heritage properties in Central America following the passage of Hurricane Mitch in October/November 1998. The report was prepared by an ICOMOS expert following a recent mission to the sites. ICOMOS provided information on five cultural sites: Joya de Ceren (El Salvador): The protective roofs proved to be inadequate to protect the excavated areas of this site. Prolonged soaking of the volcanic soil resulted in rapid plant and fungal growth on the excavated structures. The expert recommended preventive action and the full ...
At its twenty-first session (Naples, 1997), the Committee was informed by the Australian authorities of the rigorous environmental conditions set for the development activities in the Hinchinbrook region and of other measures implemented to strengthen the conservation of the Great Barrier Reef. At its twenty-second session (Kyoto, 1998), the Committee noted that the Australian authorities had acted on the findings of the financial review of the GBRMPA (Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority) to further strengthen the conservation of the site. In addition, the Committee requested the ...
At its twenty-second session the Bureau was informed that a petroleum exploration permit had been granted by the State Government of West Australia (WA) for an area located within the World Heritage site. The Australian Observer assured the Bureau that no development that threatened the World Heritage values of the site would be allowed to take place. But IUCN was concerned about the granting of prospecting licences by State Governments for locations within World Heritage areas, and urged closer liaison between Commonwealth and State Governments on this matter. At its twenty-second ...
The Bureau, at its twenty-second session learned that the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment had determined that clearing of vegetation that may have occurred within this property did not place the World Heritage values of the site at risk.  At its twenty-second extraordinary session (Kyoto, 1998), the Bureau was informed that the arrangements for the management of this site were fully effective and met with the full confidence of the Commonwealth Government of Australia. The Management Plan, effective as of 1 September 1998, had been prepared with the full involvement of all ...
The Committee, when it inscribed this property on the World Heritage List (Naples, 1997), had requested documentation on the marine resources surrounding this property. The Australian authorities informed the twenty-second extraordinary session of the Bureau (Kyoto, 1998) that the Australian Antarctic Division had granted funding to collate and analyse existing data on the benthic environments surrounding this property, including the territorial sea. In accordance with Australia’s plans to establish a marine protected area in the region, the project aims to assess whether the 12 ...
The Committee when it inscribed «The Sundarbans» of Bangladesh in the World Heritage List (Naples, 1997) encouraged the authorities of Bangladesh and India to discuss the possibility of creating a trans-frontier site with the adjoining Sundarbans National Park and World Heritage site (India). The Ministry of Environment and Forests of Bangladesh with support from the Asian Development Bank, is undertaking a multi-million dollar project, entitled the "Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project". The Sundarbans World Heritage site is considered to be one of the main components ...
At its twenty-second extraordinary session (Kyoto, 1998) the Bureau commended the Polish authorities for submitting an extension of the Bialowieza Forest and reiterated its previous request that the two States Parties co-operate to prepare a management plan for the Belarus part and consider removing the fence separating the two parts. IUCN informed the Bureau that the IUCN evaluation of the extension of the Bialowieza Forest of Poland would be submitted to the twenty-third extraordinary session of the Bureau. At that time IUCN, will also provide an analysis of transborder management ...
Since 1997, the Bureau and the Committee have repeatedly called for the permanent closure of the 18 km road traversing this Park which had been illegally opened by local people. At its twenty-second session, the Bureau requested a Centre/IUCN mission to review the situation and to assist the State Party to mitigate threats to the Park. The twenty-second extraordinary session of the Bureau (November 1998) was informed of a new threat to Iguacu’s integrity, arising from plans to fill a hydropower reservoir in southwest Brazil that would divert a considerable volume of Iguacu’s ...