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
1284 Decisions
0 Resolutions
Year end: 1993close
By Year
The application of the procedure foreseen in paragraph 40 above to cultural properties will be considered by the Committee at a later meeting.
The Committee requested the Secretariat to prepare a revised text of the "Operational Guidelines" reflecting the above-mentioned decisions and to present this text to the Bureau at its next session. One question that should be studied in this connection would be the possibility of adding a criterion on integrity for the evaluation of cultural properties.
The Committee considered that it would be desirable to be able to examine nominations at its fourth session within the framework of a national inventory of cultural and natural properties which the State Party considers suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List. This would allow for a preliminary evaluation of the comparative value of properties within that State. The Committee therefore expressed the hope that each State Party concerned would make available to the Committee before its next session a list of those properties which it intends to nominate to the World Heritage List ...
The Committee considered that it was absolutely essential that the List contained only properties which were of outstanding universal value. Unless this general criterion was applied to every nomination, the List could rapidly decline in value and indeed in credibility. With this in mind, the Committee recommended that the wording in the "Operational Guidelines" and the nomination forms should more adequately reflect this overriding consideration, and that ICOMOS and IUCN should be instructed to regard this requirement as of critical importance in their evaluation of nominations.
The Committee heard the reports of the two working groups set up to examine amendments to the criteria and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations and took the decisions set out below:  
On the general question of the number of inscriptions to be entered on the World Heritage List, as well as of the selection criteria to be applied, the Committee recalled that the Convention foresees in Article 11 paragraph 1 that each State Party "shall in so far as possible submit to the World Heritage Committee _an inventory of property forming part of the cultural and natural heritage_, situated in its territory and _suitable for inclusion_" in the World Heritage List (passages not underlined in the text of the Convention). The Committee recommends that States Parties in future ...
In response to specific questions raised by Mr. Michel Parent's report, the Committee adopted the following principles: (i) States Parties may propose in one single nomination several individual cultural properties, which may be in different geographical locations but which should: -be linked because they belong to the same historico-cultural group, or-be the subject of a single safeguarding project, or-belong to the same type of property characteristic of the zone. the geographical zone in which these properties are situated should be delimited and the cultural properties individually ...
The Committee took note of the typology proposed in Mr. Michel Parent's report. It considered that it was on the basis of the inventories submitted by States Parties that such a typology could be finalized. The question will therefore continue to be studied until its next session.
The Committee considered the complex issues concerning sites occupied by migratory species on a seasonal basis and decided to add to paragraph 11 on integrity in the "Operational Guidelines" a new sub-paragraph (v) as follows: "In cases of migratory species, integrity will require critical areas necessary for the survival of the species to be included in the nomination. States which are parties to the Convention are requested to seek the co-operation of other States which contain seasonable sites for populations of World Heritage species so as to ensure that these species are protected ...
The Australian Delegation drew attention to the fact that, on several occasions, members of the Committee and representatives of IUCN and ICOMOS had referred to the threat to which certain nominated sites were exposed, and had suggested that this factor should influence the favourable and rapid acceptance of the site in question. The Delegation expressed concern at this development, pointing out that acceptance should be based only on the established criteria dealing with the intrinsic properties of the site and, further, that if the threat affected the integrity of the site, acceptance ...
The Committee took up one by one those nominations which had been recommended by the Bureau for inscription on the List, those which had been recommended by the Bureau not to be entered on the List and nominations which raised a problem of application of the criteria, in accordance with the Committee's decision mentioned in paragraph 15 above. In each case the Committee heard, as appropriate, the comments of the representatives of IUCN and/or ICOMOS who referred to the criteria met by the property in question.
The Committee decided to enter in the World Heritage List the following 45 properties: No. Name of property / State Party___________________________________________ 19 Fasil Ghebbi, Gondar Region / Ethiopia 20 Ancient City of Damascus Syrian / Arab Republic The Committee noted the reservation expressed by ICOMOS concerning the threat to the site from rapid urban development. 31 Auschwitz concentration camp / Poland The Committee decided to enter Auschwitz concentration camp on the List as a unique site and to restrict the inscription of other sites of a similar nature. 33 ...
The Committee decided furthermore to defer the following sites: No. Name of property / State Party 8 Ichkeul National park / Tunisia The Committee deferred this nomination until the Tunisian Government has contacted the other States concerned to ensure adequate protection of summering and wintering areas of major migratory species found in Ichkeul. 79 Paphos, Birthplace of Aphrodite / Cyprus The Committee deferred this nomination until more precise information was available on the possible adverse impact on the sites of the pressing needs of tourism development. 92 Sta. Giulia/St. ...
The Committee furthermore decided not to inscribe the following two sites on the World Heritage List: No. 5: Zembra and Zembretta Islands National Park (Tunisia) andNo. 73: the Madeleine Island (Senegal).
In order to facilitate the examination by the Committee of nominations, it was decided that in future documents submitting nominations to the Committee would include indication of the criteria under which each nomination was to be considered.
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows: (a) Ecuador Equipment to enable the authorities to ensure the integrity of tho natural environment of the Galapagos Islands through protective measures. up to a maximum of $50,000
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows: (b) Tanzania Services of an architect-museologist for three weeks in order to draw up a project for the conservation and presentation of the prehistoric sites of Olduvai and Laetolil. estimated cost $5,400
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows: (c) Egypt Services of specialists in cultural heritage as well as equipment to draw up a project for the restoration and development of the Islamic Centre of Cairo. up to a maximum of $ 30,000
The Committee was informed that requests for technical co-operation were forthcoming for the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Tanzania and Virunga National Park in Zaire and agreed to delegate authority to the Chairman to approve these requests after consultation with members of the Bureau if he considered it desirable.
The Committee approved the revised nomination form (CC-79/CONF.003/7) subject to the following: (a) the text should be revised to reflect the decisions taken by the Committee on the criteria for the inclusion of properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations (see session XI above); the attention of States Parties should be drawn, in particular, to the essential criterion of outstanding universal value that should be met by properties nominated; (b) The form should emphasize the importance of adequate buffer zones and ask for details on measures ...