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

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

Decision 39 COM 8B.15
Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its surrounding sacred landscape, Mongolia

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC-15/39.COM/8B and WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes the Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its surrounding sacred landscape, Mongolia, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iv) and (vi);
  3. Takes note of the following provisional Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its surrounding landscape, lies in the central part of the Khentii mountains chain that forms the watershed between the Arctic and Pacific Oceans, where the vast Central Asian steppe meets the coniferous forests of the Siberian taiga. Water from the permanently snow-capped mountains feed significant rivers flowing both to the north and south. High up the mountains are forests and lower down mountain steppe, while in the valley below are open grasslands dissected by rivers feeding swampy meadows.

    Burkhan Khaldun is associated with Chinggis Khan, as his reputed burial site and more widely with his establishment of the Mongol Empire in 1206. It is one of four sacred mountains he designated during his lifetime, as part of the official status he gave to the traditions of mountain worship, based on long standing shamanic traditions associated with nomadic peoples. Traditions of mountain worship declined as Buddhism was adopted in the late 15th century and there appears to have been a lack of continuity of traditions and associations. Since the 1990s, the revival of mountain worship has been encouraged and old shamanist rituals are being revived and integrated with Buddhist rituals. State sponsored celebrations now take place at the mountain each summer around rivers and three stone ovoo-s (or rock cairns).

    The Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain has few structures other that three major stone ovoo-s alongside paths connected to a pilgrimage route. The cairns were apparently destroyed in the 17th century but have now been re-constructed with timber posts on top. The pilgrimage path starts some 20km from the mountain by a bridge over the Kherlen River at the Threshold Pass where there is also a major ovoo. Pilgrims ride on horseback from there to the large Beliin ovoo made of tree trunks and adorned with blue silk prayer scarves and from thence to the main ovoo of heaven at the summit of the mountain. The sacredness of the mountain is strongly associated with its sense of isolation, and its perceived ‘pristine’ nature.

    The Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its surrounding sacred landscape, as a sacred mountain, were at the centre of events that profoundly changed Asia and Europe between the 12th and 14th and centuries and have direct links with Chinggis Khan and his formal recognition of mountain worship.

    Criterion (iv): Burkhan Khaldun Sacred Mountain reflects the formalisation of mountain worship by Chinggis Khan, a key factor in his success in unifying the Mongol peoples during the creation of the Mongolian Empire, demonstrating its vital historical significance for Asian and world history.

    Criterion (vi): The Burkhan Khaldun Sacred Mountain is directly and tangibly associated with The Secret History of the Mongols, an historical and literary epic recognised as of world importance in its entry in the Memory of the World Register. The Secret History records the links between the mountain and Chinggis Khan, his formal recognition of mountain worship, and the formal status of Burkhan Khaldun as one of four sacred mountains he designated during his lifetime.


    The site has adequate attributes within its boundaries to reflect the scale and scope of the scared mountain, although the boundary needs to be delineated in relation to natural features. Further work needs to be undertaken on archaeological sites that might strengthen associations with Chinggis Khan or traditions of mountain worship.


    All the natural and cultural attributes of the Burkhan Khaldun Mountain display their value. Various parts of the mountain are vulnerable to an increase in tourism which could profoundly change its sense of isolation if not well managed, and to over-grazing that could impact on its ‘perceived’ pristine nature.

    Requirement for Protection and Management

    Although the majority of the Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain is situated on the territory of the Khan Kentii Special Protected Area (KK SPA), a small area to the north-west and a much large area to the south lie outside this protected zone. There are plans to include the whole property and its buffer zone in the territory of the KK SPA in 2015. The KK SPA offers legal protection, but this is for natural and environmental protection rather than cultural heritage protection. The buffer zone is included within the buffer zone of the KK SPA. Currently the property buffer zone has no protection for cultural attributes nor does it have any regulatory procedures related to land-use or new construction.

    Since 1990 and the renewal of older Mongolian practices related to sacred mountains, national traditions and customs of nature protection in Mongolia and the laws associated with “Khalkh Juram” have been revived and are now incorporated into State policy. On 16 May 1995, the first President of Mongolia issued a new Decree “Supporting initiatives to revive the tradition of worshiping Bogd Khan Khairkhan, Burkhan Khaldun (Khan Khentii), and Otgontenger Mountains”. The Decree pronounced the State’s support for initiatives to revive Mountain worship as described in the original Mongolian Legal Document and as “set out according to the official Decree”. A further Decree of the President on “Regulation of ceremony of worshipping and offering of state sacred mountains and ovoos” provides legal tools for visitor organization during the large state worshipping ceremonies. Any activity on Burkhan Khaldun Mountain itself, other than worshipping rituals, is traditionally forbidden. The KK reserve staff do however undertake fire-fighting, forest protection, forest clearing and renovation, and address illegal hunting and wood cutting.

    At the national level, management of the site is under the responsibility of the Ministry of Nature, Environment and Green, and of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. At the local level, local authorities at the levels of aimak-s, soum-s and bag-s have responsibility for providing local protection. Although soum administrations have people responsible for environmental protection, there appears not to be any formal arrangement for cultural heritage work. An Administration for the Protection of the World Heritage Property responsible for both natural and cultural protection and conservation of the property is to be established, although no timescale has been provided for this. Traditional protection is supported through the long standing tradition of worshipping nature and sacred places. For example, it is forbidden to disturb earth, waters, trees and all plants, animals and birds in sacred places, or hunt or cut wood for trading.

    A draft Management Plan was submitted as part of the nomination dossier. This will run from 2015-2025 and covers both cultural and natural heritage. It includes both long-term (2015-2025), and medium-term (2015-2020) plans. The draft Management Plan has not yet been approved or implemented. Before completion and adoption, more work is needed to augment the Plan to allow it to provide an appropriate framework for management of the property and necessary funding has still to be put in place from stakeholder organisations together with further support from aid and international donor organizations. Archaeological sites on the mountain that may contribute to a wider understanding of mountain worship and have not been formally identified nor are they actively conserved. Both of these aspects should be addressed in the Plan.

    Although a management plan exits for the Khan Khentii protected area and this is implemented by the Administration of Khan Khentii Special Protected Area, this is restricted to conservation of the natural environment and it appears that there is currently no active management for its cultural attributes, nor is work guided by specific cultural strategies and policies.

  4. Recommends the State Party to:
    1. Put in place legal protection for the property that covers cultural as well as natural attributes;
    2. Clearly define the protection offered by the buffer zone;
    3. Confirm that no mining or extractive industry will be permitted within the property;
    4. Put in place an overall management structure with resources to implement an augmented and approved management plan;
    5. Draw up and implement a conservation programme, covering preventative and active measures, based on a wide assessment of need and priorities;
  5. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2018, an report to provide information on the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations for examination by the World Heritage Committee in its 43rd session in 2019.
Decision Code
39 COM 8B.15
Inscriptions on the World Heritage List
States Parties 1
Decisions adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015)
Context of Decision