1. Having examined Document WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/5A,

2. Recalling its Decision 25 COM VII.25-27 at its 25th session (Helsinki, 2001) to examine Section I of the Periodic Report for Europe at its 29th session (Durban, 2005), and Section II at its 30th session (2006),

3. Notes the report on the progress of the Periodic Report for Europe.

1. Having examined Document WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/5B,
2. Recalling its Decisions 24 COM VII.1-4 and 27 COM 20B.I, adopted at its 24th session (Cairns, 2000) and its 27th session (UNESCO, 2003), respectively,
3. Takes note of the progress made in the implementation of the Regional Programme for the Arab States and in responding to the priority needs identified in the Periodic Report for the Arab States;
4. Thanks the Dutch Government for supporting the publication of such Periodic Report;
5. Requests the Director of the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to continue developing the Assistance Modules, as well as projects, as part of the strategy outlined in the Regional Programme, and to consult the concerned States Parties in the process;
6. Further requests the World Heritage Centre to report at its 30th session (2006) on the outcome of the Regional Meeting foreseen in 2005 – with particular attention to the review of the Assistance Modules and the mobilization of extra-budgetary resources for their implementation.

1. Having examined Documents WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/5C and WHC-04/7 EXT.COM/INF.11,

2. Recalling its Decision 26 COM 20, adopted at its 26th session (Budapest, 2002),

3. Notes with satisfaction the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations of the Periodic Report for Africa;

4. Thanks the Italian Government for its prompt and generous contribution to the implementation of the first session of Modules II & III of the Africa Regional Programme 2004-2007, as well as the governments and institutions detailed in the Annex for their contribution to the conservation of World Heritage Sites in Africa;

5. Invites the Director of the World Heritage Centre, in consultation with the Advisory Bodies, to take into account, in the implementation of the training component of the Africa Regional Programme, the diversity of languages as well as the need to ensure an appropriate balance between natural and cultural heritage, with a view to promoting integrated programs;

6. Takes note of the meeting of African experts on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention and on the State of Conservation of World Heritage sites in Africa planned for March 2005 in Cape Town, South Africa;

7. Calls upon the State Parties to the Convention, UNESCO, the World Heritage Centre and other partners to support this initiative;

8. Requests the Director of the World Heritage Centre to report at its 29th session (Durban, 2005) on the results and progress accomplished in the implementation of the recommendations of both the Periodic Report for Africa and the Africa Regional Programme. 

ANNEX to the Decision 7 EXT.COM 5C

List of Governments and Institutions that have contributed to the Africa Regional Programme and to the conservation of World Heritage properties in Africa:

• Belgium, Directorate-General for Development Cooperation and Federal Science Office;
• France – UNESCO Cooperation Agreement;
• Global Environment Facility (GEF)/ Small Grants Programme;
• Italy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs;
• Japan, Funds-in-Trust-Agreement with UNESCO;
• Finland, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Netherlands, Funds-in Trust-Agreement with UNESCO;
• Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD);
• Nordic World Heritage Foundation;
• Portugal, Funds-in-Trust Agreement with UNESCO;
• Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA)
• Swedish National Heritage;
• United Nations Development Programme/Global Environment Facility (UNDP/GEF).
• United Nations Foundation (UNF)

Invites the States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to submit in accordance with Article 29 of the Convention, through the World Heritage Committee, via its Secretariat the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, reports on the legislative and administrative provisions and other actions which they have taken for the application of the Convention, including the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties located on its territories;

and

Requests the World Heritage Committee to define the periodicity, form, nature and extent of the periodic reporting on the application of the World Heritage Convention and on the state of conservation of World Heritage properties and to examine and respond to these reports while respecting the principle of State sovereignty;

and

Requests the World Heritage Committee to include in its reports to the General Conference, presented in accordance with article 29.3 of the Convention, its findings as regard to the application of the Convention by the States Parties.

VII.1 The Committee considered the manner in which to implement the decision of the General Conference on the basis of some initial reflections that were presented by the Secretariat in Working Document WHC-97/CONF.208/7.

VII.2 While recognizing the need for the States Parties to report on the legislative and administrative provisions which they have taken for the application of the Convention, the Committee stressed the importance of periodic reporting as a mechanism for exchange of information and experiences between States Parties. In this context, the attention was drawn to Article 29.1 of the Convention in which States Parties are requested to report also on other actions, together with details of the experience acquired.

VII.3 A regional approach for the examination of the periodic reports by the Committee, as already proposed in paragraph 72 of the Operational Guidelines, was supported as a means to promote regional co-operation and to identify specific needs.

VII.4 As to the format of the periodic reports, the Committee stressed that this should be practical and simple with due consideration given to the specific characteristics of different types of cultural and natural heritage properties. It should, furthermore, focus on the main issue, which is the maintenance of the World Heritage values of the site and the identification of indicators for its measurement.

VII.5 The Committee reviewed different options for the periodicity of the periodic reporting, i.e. four, five or six years. Although these options will have to be studied in more detail, a great number of Committee members expressed their preference for a six-year cycle, whereas some others were of the opinion that a four- or five-year cycle would be preferable.

VII.6 There was general agreement that the decision-making on periodic reporting would not affect the importance and continuing role of reactive monitoring that is foreseen in the procedures for the eventual deletion of properties from the World Heritage List, and in reference to properties inscribed, or to be inscribed, on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

VII.7 Finally, a suggestion was made to look into the relation between the allocation of international assistance and compliance with the periodic reporting requirement.

VII.8 Concluding the debate, the Committee, having examined the resolution adopted by the 29th General Conference of UNESCO, as well as Working Document WHC-97/CONF.208/7:

1. requested the Secretariat jointly with the advisory bodies to prepare, on the basis of the observations made by the Committee, for consideration by the twenty-second session of the Bureau in 1998, a draft format for the periodic reporting by the States Parties on the application of the World Heritage Convention and on the state of conservation of World Heritage properties;

2. requested the Secretariat to submit, for consideration by the twenty-second session of the Bureau in 1998, proposals for the handling and the examination and response by the Committee to the periodic reports;

3. requested the Secretariat to prepare, on the basis of the discussions at the twenty-second session of the Bureau, a draft revision of Section II of the Operational Guidelines for consideration by the twenty-second session of the World Heritage Committee.

VI.2 During the debate, numerous Committee members commended the Secretariat for the work accomplished and expressed general agreement with the proposals made.

VI.3 Committee members expressed strong support for the regional approach and the development of regional strategies for the periodic reporting process, as proposed in the Working Document, as a means to respond to the specific characteristics of the regions and to promote regional collaboration.

VI.4 As to the periodicity of the reporting, the Committee agreed to a six-year cycle. It decided that in the first reporting cycle those properties should be reported upon that were inscribed up to eight years before the examination of the reports by the Committee.

VI.5 The Committee, furthermore, stressed the important role the States Parties themselves, as well as the advisory bodies and other organizations should play in the periodic reporting process, in the development of the regional strategies and in the review of the reports submitted by the States Parties.

VI.6 Several delegates referred to the future workload for the Secretariat, the advisory bodies and the Committee and requested that this be carefully considered in the planning of the work of the Centre and the advisory bodies, as well as in the management of the agenda of the Committee.

VI.7 The Committee, having examined Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6 and the corresponding Section of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/16, adopted the following decision:

A. Following the request made by the 29th General Conference of UNESCO, the World Heritage Committee:

(a) Invites States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to submit, in accordance with Article 29 of the World Heritage Convention and the decisions of the Eleventh General Assembly of States Parties and the 29th General Conference of UNESCO, periodic reports on the legislative and administrative provisions and other actions which they have taken for the application of the World Heritage Convention, including the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties located on its territories;

(b) Invites States Parties to submit periodic reports every six years using the format for periodic reports as adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its twenty-second session;

(c) Expresses its wish to examine the States Parties' periodic reports region by region. This will include the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List according to the following table:

Region	Examination of Properties inscribed up to and including	Year of examination by Committee
Arab States	1992	2000
Africa	1993	2001
Asia and the Pacific	1994	2002
Latin America and the Caribbean	1995	2003
Europe and North America	1996/1997	2004/2005

(d) Requests the Secretariat, jointly with the advisory bodies, and making use of States Parties, competent institutions and expertise available within the region, to develop regional strategies for the periodic reporting process as per the above-mentioned time table, and to present them with budgetary proposals for their implementation to the twenty-third session of the World Heritage Committee for consideration and adoption. These strategies should respond to specific characteristics of the regions and should promote coordination and synchronization between States Parties, particularly in the case of transboundary properties.

B. As to the format for the periodic reports, the Committee adopted the proposal made in Annex I of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6, with the following revisions:

Section II.1. to read as follows :

"II.1 Introduction

a. State Party

b. Name of World Heritage property

c. Geographical co-ordinates

d. Date of inscription on the World Heritage List

e. Organization(s) or entity(ies) responsible for the preparation of the report

f. Date of report

g. Signature on behalf of State Party"

Section II, item II.3. to read as follows :

"II.3. Statement of authenticity/integrity"

Section II, item II.7. to read as follows :

"II.7. Conclusions and recommended action

a. Main conclusions regarding the state of the World Heritage values of the property (see items II.2. and II.3. above)

b. Main conclusions regarding the management and factors affecting the property (see Items II.4 and II.5. above)

c. Proposed future actions

d. Responsible implementing agency/agencies

e. Timeframe for implementation

f. Needs for international assistance."

C. As to the explanatory notes that will be attached to the format for periodic reports, the Committee adopted the proposals made in Annex I of Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/6, with the following revisions:

II.2. Statement of Significance, paragraph four to be read as follows:

"If a statement of significance is not available or incomplete, it will be necessary, in the first periodic report, for the State Party to propose such a statement. The statement of significance should reflect the criterion (criteria) on the basis of which the Committee inscribed the property on the World Heritage List. It should also address questions such as: What does the property represent, what makes the property outstanding, what are the specific values that distinguish the property, what is the relationship of the site with its setting, etc. Such statement of significance will be examined by the advisory body(ies) concerned and transmitted to the World Heritage Committee for approval, if appropriate ."

II.4. Management, paragraphs one and two to be read as follows:

"Under this item, it is necessary to report on the implementation and effectiveness of protective legislation at the national, provincial or municipal level and/or contractual or traditional protection as well as of management and/or planning control for the property concerned, as well as on actions that are foreseen for the future, to preserve the values described in the statement of significance under item II.2.

The State Party should also report on significant changes in the ownership, legal status and/or contractual or traditional protective measures, management arrangements and management plans as compared to the situation at the time of inscription or the previous periodic report. In such case, the State Party is requested to attach to the periodic report all relevant documentation, in particular legal texts, management plans and/or (annual) work plans for the management and maintenance of the property. Full name and address of the agency or person directly responsible for the property should also be provided."

D. The Committee adopted the revision of Section II of the Operational Guidelines as submitted in Working Document WHC-98/CONF.203/16, including the amendments made above.

VI.8 The format for periodic reports and explanatory notes as adopted by the World Heritage Committee is attached in Annex III.

IX.2 Particular mention was made of the links with the implementation of the Global Strategy. The periodic monitoring exercise would help States Parties to recognize their insufficiencies in the field of conservation and facilitate the identification of their needs. The managers of the sites will be trained and ultimately regional expert networks will be strengthened.

IX.3 In the Arab States, eighteen States Parties will have to prepare reports concerning forty-four sites (41 cultural, one mixed and two natural). The exercise for the Arab region which should be completely finalised over a period of less than eleven months, comprises the following stages:

- an analysis of information available to UNESCO and the advisory bodies (nomination files, statutory reports, mission reports, etc.);

- an information and training phase for responsible nationals in charge of the preparation of the reports of their countries (regional seminar, preparatory work, national seminars);

- preparatory phase for national reports to be attended by international consultants to assist States Parties;

- a phase for the synthesis of reports and the preparation of the regional report which should be ready by September 2000 for submission to the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee. This exercise in the Arab region, which will serve as a useful example for the other regions, will permit the (i) harmonisation of national tentative lists; (ii) validation of the use of this exercise for the revision of early nomination files, incomplete in comparison to the new format; (iii) testing the questionnaires of the exercise in a continuum way; (iv) verification of the criteria concerning the sites; (v) identification of the regional and national priorities in terms of international co-operation. Finally, it will allow the Secretariat to improve its information on the sites inscribed and will also be beneficial to States Parties.

IX.4 In Africa, eighteen States Parties will have to prepare reports concerning forty sites, twenty-three of which are natural, sixteen cultural and one mixed. The exercise for Africa was conceived in seven stages that have been established in a participatory manner to involve States Parties and site managers, thereby ensuring a training character to the preparation of the final report.

Stage I: Preparation and dispatch of a specific form to draw the attention of States Parties to the monitoring issue and to obtain a first input of information relating to the implementation of the Convention.

Stage II: Collection of preliminary results and elaboration of regional workshop programmes, to process the resulting information into a data base and to identify specific information which should be provided to each site manager during the training seminars.

Stage III: Organization of two regional training seminars: Anglophone and Francophone Africa, which will convene managers of both natural and cultural site. During these workshops, they will:

• present their sites and identify common issues;
• have the opportunity to discuss the methodology of the exercise;
• obtain additional information for the completion of the forms for each site.

These three stages should be completed by autumn 2000.

Stage IV: Exchange of additional information with site managers, before reception of the final version of the forms.

Stage V: Analysis of the forms to compare the site in situ between the time of inscription and the present; define minimal methods for regular monitoring, identify the involvement of local populations in the management of the sites and identify the site issues.

Stage VI: Identification of fragile sites and study missions (2001).

Stage VII: Completion of the final report and dissemination of the exercise, and submission of the report to the Committee for 2001. The periodic report will constitute a reflection of the situation. In a continent where the collection, analysis and stockage of information is often difficult, the emphasis will be placed on understanding the conservation process, the importance of collecting of information and its presentation and use, rather than on the exhaustive research for information.

IX.5 During these discussions, fourteen speakers took the floor, including the three advisory bodies and congratulated the Secretariat for the clarity of the document, its conception and the transparency of the proposed budget. The importance of the participatory approach and the importance given to training were also emphasized. However, the speakers insisted upon the need to continue the exercise, to establish a cumulative process, the importance of the documentation, the identification of key indicators, the implication of the local populations, and public awareness raising. They commented that this exercise should also include a communication plan. They requested that the role of the advisory bodies be defined.

IX.6 The Representative of IUCN informed the Committee that the systematic approach to periodic reporting on a regional basis is a very positive initiative but IUCN, as one of advisory bodies named in the Convention, is unclear as to what role, if any, it is expected to play in the periodic reporting process. The role of the advisory bodies in reactive monitoring is clear from the Operational Guidelines. He stated for example that the material on the process in Arab States as well as in Africa does not make any mention of the advisory bodies. With these first regional strategies, IUCN thought that it was very important that the Committee indicates clearly whether the advisory bodies have a role to play in the regions, as it will establish a pattern for the future. IUCN informed the Committee that it has rich experience in association with States Parties that it could bring to bear on periodic reporting. He recalled the statements made by several delegates that stressed the value of IUCN's input. The Representative of IUCN further noted that the involvement of the advisory bodies would have resource implications. Moreover, IUCN is working towards the World Parks Congress (held every ten years) to be convened in Durban, South Africa in September 2002, and IUCN is planning two regional working sessions in Africa - one for Francophone Africa and the other for Anglophone Africa during 2001.

IX.7 The views of IUCN were supported by ICOMOS and ICCROM and fully endorsed by several delegates. ICOMOS specifically stressed the importance of regional monitoring and stated that the periodic reporting exercise should be considered as a formative one where site managers can be trained, and called for more liaison with the with the advisory bodies in view of their experience in producing Guidelines. In reference to remarks made by several delegates on the Reference Manual for Monitoring, ICCROM clarified the place of the manual in the periodic reporting process. The Representative of ICCROM stated that the Committee had allocated US$8,000 to ICCROM in December 1998 to begin the development of a Reference Manual for Monitoring. ICCROM organized two meetings in 1999 with experts representing the advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre, to develop an approach for preparing the manual. The purpose of the Manual is to provide guidance to site managers at the local level, a target that is recognized as important in the process of periodic reporting by several delegates. ICCROM has been working with the other advisory bodies and the World Heritage Centre in the development of the Manual, that has been designed to be a useful scientific reference tool for site managers at all levels of responsibility in carrying out their duties. ICCROM has submitted a request of US$16,000 to the current session of the Committee in order to finalize the Manual, an initiative that should be considered as complementary to the Centre's presentation.

IX.8 Several delegates stressed the importance of establishing benchmarks and indicators and while these may be established at the site level, the monitoring process should not be an end in itself, but should serve different levels of the citizenry, and should be forward-looking with a well defined objective.

IX.9 Committee members stressed that the periodic monitoring exercise should be targeted primarily to involve the States Parties and site managers, and that putting the process into the hands of the local managers would render it more useful. It was emphasized that the local population should be involved as much as possible since their participation is critical to the conservation of heritage.

IX.10 At the end of the debate, precisions and clarifications were provided by the Secretariat which has committed to reflect in the forms which will be sent to States Parties, the remarks made by the Committee.

IX.11 The Committee requested the Secretariat to take note of the proposal to invite the participation of the UNEP/PAM Programme 100 historical sites in the exercise to benefit from the resources and gain experience.

IX.12 The Committee approved the methodology, the action plan of the Arab region, as well as the strategic approach of the exercise for the African region. It took note of the budgetary proposals for 2000 that will be processed during the examination of the work plan and budget of the World Heritage Fund.

XVIII.2 The Observer of Uganda informed the Committee that the question of the involvement of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) should be reviewed, in particular with regard to the movable heritage, in particular with regard to moveable heritage and the serious problem of illicit traffic in Africa.

XVIII.3 The Observer of Poland underlined the importance of a pluridisciplinary approach in the safeguarding of heritage. The criteria of the World Heritage Convention should respect the wealth of regional diversity.

VII.14 The Committee approved the regional strategies presented in Annexes I, II, III and IV of Working Document WHC-2000/CONF.204/8. The budgetary implications are considered under item 13 of the Agenda (WHC-2000/CONF.204/15, Chapter IV of the budget).

VII.1 The Secretariat presented the report on Periodic Reporting in the Africa Region (WHC-01/CONF. 208/7) to the Committee. As at November 2001, fifty-three sites were inscribed on the World Heritage List. Forty of these sites were inscribed prior to 1993 and located in eighteen countries, comprising twenty-three natural, sixteen cultural and one mixed site, and were the subject of this monitoring report. The strategic approach for the compilation of the report and the co-operation of the African States Parties in the Periodic Reporting Exercise was explained. Of the possible eighteen reports on the state of implementation of the Convention by the States Parties, sixteen had been received, and of a possible forty state of conservation reports, thirty-two had been received, representing a rate of 80%.

VII.2 As regards the state of the regional overview on the implementation of the Convention, the Secretariat drew the attention of the Committee to the following issues:

• Periodic Reporting on the implementation of the Convention should not only be limited to countries with sites inscribed on the List;
• Lack of policy and legislative measures for heritage conservation: where policy measures exist, the lack of solid policies and programmes to put these measures into effect is insufficient to implement them;
• High central government-driven initiatives concerning sites with little involvement of the local population or non-governmental organizations;
• Inadequate professional personnel, skills and equipment;
• Lack of scientific information to enhance and update the management knowledge and methods;
• Lack of financial resources to manage sites and techniques for mobilizing international support;
• Lack of education and public awareness concerning World Heritage values;
• Poorly defined and poorly understood World Heritage values;
• Lack of mechanisms for addressing natural and anthropic threats to World Heritage;
• Non-existence of frameworks for bi- and multilateral cooperation for designing transborder sites; and
• Lack of nominations from countries that ratified the Convention in earlier years.

VII.3 In the light of these observations, and the achievements of the Global Strategy, the Secretariat emphasized the following challenges facing World Heritage conservation in Africa:

• Mainstreaming World Heritage protection within the public and private sectors of the African countries;
• Convincing the private sector to incorporate heritage protection in their activities;
• Establish long-term conservation financing programmess for African sites (e.g. the setting up of the African Heritage Fund);
• Promoting urban and regional planning for both urban and rural heritage;
• Promoting transparency in heritage resource management;
• Promoting more proactive use of environmental assessment tools for the decision making process; and
• Effective management through regional and subregional training, accountability, cooperation, coordination and agreements.

VII.4 The Secretariat presented an Action Plan focused on:

• Co-operation and Networks for better sharing of resources;
• Training for more skilled and efficient manpower;
• Wider participation to ensure long and sustained conservation of World Heritage in Africa;
• Management to address deficiencies at the national level and on the sites;
• Scientific research and reporting to enhance knowledge at sites, and
• update methods for site protection and information sharing.

VII.5 The Secretariat recommended the convening of the second round of regional meetings with site managers. Meetings with the Permanent Delegations to UNESCO and with the National Commissions for UNESCO should also be held. The Secretariat also recommended the adoption by the Committee of the Action Plan, to be funded by the World Heritage Fund, extrabudgetary sources and the African Heritage Fund.

VII.6 Following the presentation, several interventions were made by Committee members and observers. After debate, the Committee deferred the adoption of the African Periodic Report, on the basis of the following comments:

• the complete Report should have been provided to enable the Committee to have the information which led to the conclusion and recommendations of the Report, provided as a Working Document;
• in view of the importance of the Report and the issues involved in the Periodic Reporting Exercise, the Committee requested that a copy of the report be provided to all members to provide an opportunity to thoroughly study the Report (CD-Rom version), and certain recommendations contained in the Report submitted to the Committee which may be difficult to implement.

VII.7 The Committee noted that the proposed Action Plan should be completed with a quantitative plan, highlighting actions to be undertaken in the short and in the long term, and associating the follow up activities to periodic reporting with the activities undertaken under the Africa 2009 Programme.

VII.8 As regards the proposed African Heritage Fund, while expressing the urgent need to support African countries, the Committee requested a detailed description of the Fund and suggested that it should have a structure whereby the Committee could have a say in its utilisation.

VII.9 In considering the level of awareness raising, the Committee noted that each regional action plan differed, and that more awareness raising activities are foreseen in the follow up to the Periodic Reporting Exercise. The Committee noted that the countries concerned will gain six more months following approval of the proposed cycle for periodic reporting.

VII.10 To simplify the work of the Committee, it was decided to provide the Committee with the summary report. However, the Committee was informed that the full report would be made available to its members.

VII.11 IUCN welcomed the report on Africa. Africa is the only region where the number of natural sites exceeds the number of cultural sites. In addition, 22% of all natural World Heritage sites are from Africa. Alarmingly, 42% of natural sites on the List of World Heritage in Danger are from Africa, in some cases the result of armed conflict related issues as in the Democratic Republic of Congo. IUCN considered that this required increasing emphasis by the Committee on African heritage conservation, particularly through activities which build local support, linking conservation to sustainable development and support capacity building efforts. However, it is important to understand that root causes such as poverty, debt, lack of development and ethnic conflict afflict too many African countries. These underlying causes will be addressed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002.

VII.12 IUCN felt the report has many positive points but that the recommendations would have more impact if the set of priority items were presented in a clearer and shorter fashion. IUCN also informed the Committee that the World Parks Congress (WPC) will be held in Durban in September 2003. This 10-yearly event is key in shaping the world's protected areas now covering the equivalent of 10% of the earth's terrestrial surface. The WPC will include a major focus on World Heritage and on African conservation. The meeting will provide an important opportunity to address the issues identified in the Periodic Reporting Exercise.

VII.13 The ICCROM Representative reported that several activities proposed in the Action Plan are already being implemented by ICCROM under Africa 2009, and more links will be established with the periodic reporting.

VII.14 The Committee noted that the Action Plan as well as the recommendations were derived from consultations with the States Parties during regional meetings, responses to the questionnaires and through various consultant missions undertaken to assist the participating countries.

VII.15 As regards follow up consultations with the concerned African States Parties, the Committee noted that the Chairperson had approved two international assistance requests amounting to US$40,000 to enable the organization in Africa of two follow up meetings for Francophone and Anglophone African countries respectively.

VII.16 Taking into consideration the above observations, the Committee deferred the adoption of the African Periodic Report and the proposed Action Plan. It recommended that the Centre re-examine the African Periodic Report in consultation with the States Parties, taking into consideration the comments, and re-submit the Report to the next session of the World Heritage Committee. The Report should include more details on the proposed Action Plan and the proposed African Heritage Fund, and be circulated to the States Parties. A Progress Report on the African Periodic Reporting Exercise should be submitted to the next Bureau of the World Heritage Committee.

1. Requests the World Heritage Centre to produce a publication within three months, if possible, to be funded from extrabudgetary funds, on the Arab States Periodic Report carried out in the year 2000 and information on the follow-up actions.  This publication is also to be made available through electronic or other appropriate means (CD-Rom and/or on the UNESCO World Heritage Centre's web site);

2. Notes the progress made to date in the preparation for the Periodic Reporting in Latin America and the Caribbean and in Europe and North America.

1. Decides, in view of the time constraints, to defer the presentation and the discussion of this item until its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006).

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30COM/11A.1 and taking note of Document WHC-06/30COM/INF.11A,

2. Recalling Decisions 25 COM VII.25-27 and 7 EXT COM 5A.2, adopted respectively at its 25th session (Helsinki, 2001) and 7th extraordinary session (UNESCO, 2004),

3. Expressing its sincere appreciation for the considerable efforts by all 48 States Parties in Europe in submitting the Periodic Reports for Section I in 2004 and Section II in 2005,

4. Notes the successful use of an electronic tool, the development of an evaluation tool and the storage in a World Heritage Centre database of all information submitted by the States Parties;

5. Thanks the German authorities for hosting a European meeting (Berlin, Germany, 8 - 9 November 2005) on the results of Periodic Reporting Section I and the finalization of Section II, as well as the development of an overall Strategic Action Plan and welcomes the "Berlin Appeal" to enhance cooperation and support by European States Parties and European Institutions on World Heritage;

6. Welcomes with satisfaction the synthesis report of the European Region illustrating a growing co-operation among States Parties;

7. Acknowledges and endorses the Action Plan of the European synthesis report on Section I and II and the sub-regional reports and requests the States Parties to make an effort towards a coordinated approach for its implementation;

8. Requests States Parties to work with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to start implementing the Action Plan for the European Region;

9. Further notes that preparations for the follow-up to the Periodic Reporting results, including name changes, boundary changes and statements of significance have started in some European States Parties, following the Circular Letter of 23 January 2006, and welcomes the meetings offered by the Greek authorities in November 2006, by the French authorities in October 2006 and by the Spanish authorities in January 2007, to ensure a coordinated and systematic approach of these follow-up activities;

10. Notes the importance of management plans for the protection of World Heritage properties and that many European sites reviewed lack this tool, and requests States Parties to prepare management plans for those World Heritage properties that still do not have them;

11. Recognizes the need to avoid the nomination of similar types of properties and encourages States Parties to cooperate in harmonizing their Tentative Lists by sharing information on the sites proposed;

12. Strongly encourages the States Parties in Europe to continue the improved cooperation and requests all States Parties to submit any changes to names, criteria, boundaries and statements of significance in a timely fashion and in accordance with deadlines outlined in the Operational Guidelines;

13. Notes also that such proposals (and the similar ones made in Periodic Reports for other Regions) have considerable resource and workload implications for the Committee, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies as well as for States Parties;

14. Further requests that all European States Parties provide an official letter to the World Heritage Centre by 31 September 2006, indicating their agreement to make the electronic database available for data-sharing with the Council of Europe and other partners as well as on the World Heritage webpage for the general public;

15. Requests the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to prepare a progress report on the follow-up to the European Periodic Report including time tables, budgetary implications and priorities for examination at its 31st session in 2007.

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/11B,

2. RecallingDecisions 29 COM 11 A.4 and 29 COM 11 A.5 adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Noting proposals for changes to the nomination dossiers for some World Heritage properties in North America,

4. Approves the Statements of significance for the World Heritage properties in North America as included in Annex I of Document WHC-06/30.COM/11B;

5. Notes the changes to the names as indicated in Document WHC-06/30.COM/8B, and further notes the adjustments to natural heritage criteria concerning geological values, as indicated in Document WHC-06/30.COM/8D and decides to also change the name of Redwood National Park to Redwood National and State Parks;

6. Encourages the State Party of Canada to put forward extensions to Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks and Wood Buffalo National Park, pursuant to Canada's Tentative List for World Heritage Sites (2004);

7. Encourages Canada and the United States of America to submit any outstanding documentation related to World Heritage properties, as soon as possible;

8. Recommends that Canada and the United States of America continue, in cooperation with other Committee members, States Parties, the Advisory Bodies and the World Heritage Centre to explore, as appropriate, the potential for developing guidelines for management plans and principles for evaluating visual impacts for activities in and adjacent to World Heritage properties;

9. Encourages Canada and the United States of America to continue their strong collaboration and to consider how to enhance collaboration with the State Party of Mexico in matters of shared interest for natural and cultural heritage.