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 19 EXT.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
97 Decisions
0 Resolutions
Year start: 1991close
Year end: 1991close
By Year
The Eighth General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage met in Paris, on 2 November 1991, during the twenty-sixth session of the General Conference. Eighty-one out of the hundred and seventeen States which were Parties to the Convention as at 31 October 1991 and which had the right to vote were represented at the meeting. A State having just ratified the Convention was also present. Representatives of ten States not Parties to the Convention participated in the General Assembly as observers. Representatives ...
7. The General Assembly elected by acclamation Mr Adul Wichiencharoen (Thailand) as Chairman. The General Assembly also unanimously elected the representatives of Brazil, Morocco, Pakistan, and Senegal as Vice-Chairmen, and Ms Catherine Delaporta (Greece) as Rapporteur.
8. The agenda of the session was unanimously adopted after inversion of items 7 and 8 of the provisional agenda.
12. When examining item 7 of the agenda concerning the means of ensuring an equitable representation of different regions and cultures of the world on the World Heritage Committee, the Assembly expressed the wish to be presented regularly with the charts prepared by the Secretariat: one presenting for each State Party the periods during which they have been members of the Committee, the other showing the distribution of Member States of the Committee according to the different regions. One delegate recalled that the seventh General Assembly had questioned the opportunity of increasing the ...
13. Under item 8 of its agenda the General Assembly was called on to elect seven Members to the World Heritage Committee to replace the following seven Members who would have completed their term of office at the end of the twenty-sixth session of the General Conference: Bulgaria, Canada, Greece, India, Mexico, United Republic of Tanzania, and Yemen. The list of States Parties having submitted their candidature was read out to the Assembly. In accordance with Article 16, paragraph 5, of the Convention, the list of candidates was limited to those States Parties which had paid their ...
18. Under item 9 of the agenda "Other business", the representative of Mauritania seconded by another delegate requested that the summary record of the debates mention his regret at the fact that the elections had not in the least improved the geographical distribution, which was recognized by everyone to be necessary. Indeed, no African State south of the Sahara had been elected, and this region was thus represented on the Committee by only one State.It was furthermore suggested that the Secretariat prepare for the next General Assembly a revised project of its Rules of Procedure with ...
19. The Chairman drew the attention of the delegates on a draft amendment, presented by 48 Member States of UNESCO, concerning the "Reinforcement of the Action of UNESCO for the Protection of the World Cultural Heritage" which was later submitted to the General Conference in plenary. He then said he was pleased with the positive attitude which had emerged during the debates and declared the eighth General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Committee closed.
31. The Bureau recalled that the Committee, at its last session, expressed serious concerns regarding the infection of the remaining 3,200 bison in this Park by brucellosis and tuberculosis, as well as with logging operations. The Bureau was informed of a longer term threat to the integrity of the site caused by activities upstream along the Peace/Athabasca Rivers, which include the expansion of pulp mills, logging operations and dam construction resulting in water pollution and loss of water quality, changes in the flooding regime and the gradual drying-up of the Athabasca delta. The ...
The Bureau was pleased to note that the Australian Cabinet has decided not to allow mining at Coronation Hill, located in an area that is being considered for nomination as an extension to this World Heritage site as part of Stage III of the expansion. The Australian observer informed the Bureau that the proposed Stage III of the extension of Kakadu National Park would add approximately another 6,000 sq.km to this site and wished to know whether or not the nomination of this extension needed to follow the procedure to submit a new nomination. The Bureau recalled that each of the stages I ...
The Bureau recalled that the Committee, when it inscribed this site on the World Heritage List in 1988, requested IUCN to submit a progress report in 1991 on the implementation of an effective management regime. The Bureau noted that although a management agency has been set up, the Director and staff were only recently appointed and that the management planning process has been delayed and no additional funds for field management activities have been provided. The Bureau was also concerned about the pace of tourism development and a proposal for a hydropower development project which ...
The Bureau recalled that these two sites cover the same waterfall area which extends across the two countries. The Bureau was concerned that, for tourist purposes, eight helicopters now simultaneously overfly the falls causing serious acoustic disturbance in an otherwise natural setting, and that more than 7,000 visitors have registered complaints. The Bureau also noted that local non-governmental organizations are opposing the use of helicopters as an inappropriate activity that contravenes legal air traffic regulations for flights over protected areas. The Bureau requested the ...
The Bureau noted with satisfaction that a major expansion of this site, to include a large area of the Rhodope Mountains, is now under consideration by the Bulgarian authorities. The Bureau wished to encourage the Bulgarian authorities to proceed with the extension of Pirin and to consider submitting a revised nomination of the expanded site. The Bureau also noted the comment of the IUCN representative to the effect that there was great potential for establishing a transborder site with Greece by including areas ajacent to Pirin in Greece. If established this transborder park could be one ...
The Bureau noted that in order to accommodate the exploitation of some of the gas deposits under this site which are privately owned, the boundaries of this site have been modified to excise 1,415 acres and add 1,478 acres of higher geological value. Although the Bureau was satisfied with the fact that this swap met the approval of the Provincial Parks Branch of Alberta and the slanted drilling technology to be employed will not have adverse impacts on the integrity of the site, the Bureau observed that drilling of any wells inside the Park would cause greater concern. The Delegate of ...
The Bureau noted with concern that despite a large-scale EEC project, this Park still had no management plan; it continued to be poached intensively, though there had been an appreciable reduction of poaching, particularly of elephants. The loss of six wardens, killed by poachers early in the year, was a regrettable occurrence; the Bureau wished to offer its condoleances to the victims' families. The Bureau also recommended that a management plan be elaborated and that this aspect of the EEC project be implemented as soon as possible. Activities connected with tourism should be integrated ...
The Bureau was pleased to note that as requested by the Committee at its last session, the Panamanian authorities have agreed to the inscription of this transborder national park as a single site on the World Heritage List. The Bureau urged the Costa Rican authorities to clarify their position to the Secretariat on this matter. The Bureau recalled that during its last session in Banff, the Committee also requested the Costa Rican authorities to revise the boundaries of the La Amistad National Park within their country in accordance with the recommendations made by IUCN. The Bureau noted ...
The Bureau noted with satisfaction that a plan to develop the infrastructures of this Park, funded by the World Bank in the amount of 500 million CFA Francs, was under way. In particular, it should make it possible to improve surveillance and combat local poaching. The Bureau also noted that the Côte d'Ivoire wished to set up a research station for the purpose of studying the ecosystems of the Park and helping to monitor the management of the site; the Bureau recommended that the Secretariat seek bilateral and multilateral funding to this end and that this effort to promote research ...
The Bureau noted with satisfaction that this Park benefitted from strong support of German and WWF co-operation for research and conservation of the site, and in the future, incorporation of its peripheral zones in an integrated development plan. But the site was under threat from poachers and from the arrival in the area of refugees from Liberia. Consequently the Bureau wished to encourage the Côte d'Ivoire's partners to back up the existing project by making use of the work already done by the Tai research station in the context of UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere project ...
The Bureau recalled that this site was one of the first natural areas to be inscribed on the World Heritage List. It was abandoned by the staff of the Wildlife Conservation Organization in 1985 due to civil unrest in the area. Since then there are no reliable reports of its condition. A new government is now being formed and hence the Bureau requested that the Secretariat contact the Permanent Delegation for Ethiopia in UNESCO in order to develop mechanisms to obtain an assessment of the present status of this site.
The Secretariat had indicated that it had received, and passed on to the French authorities, another letter from a French association for the protection of the environment drawing attention to potential dangers to this site arising from two projects: the construction of an industrial pig farm and the opening of a leisure park. In reply, the French observer assured the Bureau that neither of these two projects had been authorized, and that the extension and protection of the Mont Saint Michel site was under way at the national level. The Bureau took note of these assurances with ...
The Bureau took cognizance of the IUCN report on the plan to exploit an iron ore deposit which, though situated outside the Nature Reserve proper, nevertheless lay within the site inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1981. The Bureau also noted the remark of a Guinean observer who recalled the commitments contained in the new management plan of the Mont Nimba Biosphere Reserve which the Guinean authorities had recently sent to the Secretariat, and the efforts made by those authorities to reconcile development problems with the conservation requirements of the area. The Bureau recalled ...