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

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








1944 Decisions
0 Resolutions
Theme: Inscriptions on the World Heritage Listclose
By Year
Several members considered that an independent assessment by experts of the nominations submitted would be essential and it was proposed that the nominations should be transmitted, for comments and evaluation, to the Rome Centre, ICOMOS or IUCN, as appropriate.
The very tight calendar proposed was discussed in some detail, with many participants referring once more to the difficulties their own governments would have to face in preparing in time their nominations. The question of limiting the number of nominations to be submitted by States was again raised, and whereas the decision previously taken in plenary not to impose any limit was maintained, it was decided that States would be requested to indicate an order of priority among the nominations submitted. States would, at the same time, be reminded that the process of submitting nominations ...
The exact role to be played by the Rome Centre, ICOMOS and IUCN gave rise to some discussion, one member proposing that all nominations should be transmitted automatically by the Secretariat for comments and evaluation to the competent organization. The representative of the Director-General agreed that the organizations had an extremely important role to play in reviewing the dossiers submitted by States Parties, and in particular in putting them into order but he feared that the addition of another step in the already tight calendar might entail delays. It was therefore decided that the ...
In order to present the Committee at its second session with a set of nominations that would be balanced by category and by geographical and cultural region, it was decided that the Bureau, meeting in June 1978, would review all the nominations received and decide which would be forwarded to the Committee. The following calendar would thus be followed: November 1977: dispatch to States Parties of Director-General's letter, together with printed nomination form; 1 April 1978: receipt of nominations from States Parties; April/May 1978: dossiers will be received and completed, if ...
10. ICOMOS confirmed that the description of the property comprised the totality of the Old City and its Walls, and included both the list of buildings submitted with the original nomination and the supplementary list.11. The Committee registered this confirmation. It agreed that "The Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" constituted an historic ensemble which should be considered in its totality as a coherent whole whose balance and specific character depend on the synthesis of the elements of which it is composed and where the preservation should be carried out taking into account the ...
The Committee examined these three cases first and stated with satisfaction that appropriate documentation for two properties had in the meantime been received. As regards the third case (National Park of Ichkeul) the Committee decided, in agreement with the delegate of Tunisia, to defer its decision to its next session subject to receipt of the requested information.
The Committee, upon finding itself in full agreement with the list proposed by the Bureau, decided to enter the following 12 properties in the World Heritage List: NAME OF PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST (STATE PARTY) L'Anse aux Meadows National Historic Park (Canada) Nahanni National Park (Canada) Galapagos Islands (Ecuador) City of Quito (Ecuador) Simien National Park (Ethiopia) Rock Hewn Churches, Lalibela (Ethiopia) Aachen Cathedral  (Federal Republic of Germany) Cracow's Historic Centre (Poland) Wieliczka - salt mine ...
The Committee further decided to defer consideration of all other nominations listed in document CC-78/CONF.010/7 until its third session. All these nominations, as well as those received after the Bureau meeting and listed in document CC-78/CONF.010/7 Add.1 (for which it had been impossible to complete the technical review, translation and transmission to all States members of the Committee in time before the second session) would be transmitted to the Bureau for examination prior to their consideration by the Committee at its next session.
The Chairman then thanked the States Parties for their efforts, which had made it possible to initiate the establishment of the World Heritage List. He also recalled that the time and order of entry of a property in the World Heritage List should by no means be interpreted as an indication of the qualification of a property or judgment on its value in comparison to other properties in the list, as all of them had met the criteria adopted by the Committee.
The Committee continued its work by discussing suitable future closing dates for the submission of nominations and agreed that nominations, in order to be examined at the next Bureau meeting, should be with the Secretariat by 1 March 1979 at the latest. Thereafter, however, the deadline for submission of nominations would be 1 January so that more time would be available to the Secretariat, ICOMOS and IUCN for the processing and technical review of the new dominations.
There followed considerable discussion as to whether the number of nominations per country and year should be limited or not and how to solve the problem of the increasing workload for all parties involved in the evaluation process, which may become rather time-consuming and may even exceed the capacity of the advisory organizations, the Bureau, the Committee and the UNESCO Secretariat in the future.
In this connection, reference was made to Article 11 (1) of the Convention which stipulates no limit for the number of nominations by a single State Party. However, in recognizing this stipulation the Committee, for purely practical reasons, authorized the Chairman to convene, if necessary, a special Bureau meeting after the closing date for submission of nominations in order to examine, together with the advisory organizations and the Secretariat, the possibility of evaluating all new nominations and to adopt a procedure which would take into account the capacities of all parties ...
Following a proposal made by the delegate of Yugoslavia who underlined the importance of the decisions taken by the Committee for the establishment of the World Heritage List, the Committee decided that a document concerning the nominations of States and presenting the recommendations of the Bureau thereon, would be prepared for the Committee which would examine the nominations one by one and would decide on the inclusion or non-inclusion in the List of each individual site.
The delegate of Poland then drew the attention of the Committee to paragraphs 20 and 21 of the report of the Rapporteur on the first meeting of the Bureau. As noted in the report, Poland was the only State affected by the decision that on this first occasion, States Parties would be limited to nominating only two properties each for inclusion in the World Heritage List, since it had nominated three sites which clearly qualified for inclusion and for which complete documentation had been submitted: Auschwitz, Cracow and the Salt Mines of Wieliczka. It would, therefore, appear justified ...
In response to this proposal the Committee agreed that in all future cases where eligible nominations were deferred by the Bureau, such nominations would be given priority consideration at the following Bureau meeting, unless these nominations had in the meantime been withdrawn by the State concerned.
The Bureau decided to recommend that this site be entered on the two lists provided that the Committee agreed with a special procedure for the emergency inscription of properties on the World Heritage List. The Bureau decided that the technical cooperation request should be examined after the Committee had taken decisions on the above mentioned matters.
In view of the difficulty of assessing nominations without an adequate inventory, the Committee decided to encourage States Parties to prepare such inventories. It was furthermore decided to ask IUCN to prepare a proposal for the next meeting of the Bureau relating to the methodology and cost of preparing an inventory on a global basis.
The Committee decided to instruct IUCN to use great caution in the application of criterion (iv) when it was the sole criterion for recommending sites for the World Heritage List. The sites nominated under this criterion should be habitats where "significant populations" or "concentrations of populations" of rare or endangered species of plants or animals survive, that is, sites representing in some way "superlative situations".
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.
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 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.
The Committee discussed 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, and were hence recommended by the Bureau to be deferred. In each case the Committee heard, as appropriate, the comments of the representatives of IUCN and/or ICOMOS who presented an evaluation of each property in question in relation to the criteria. The representatives of IUCN and ICOMOS were invited when appro- priate ...
The Committee also decided to extend the protected site of Ohrid Lake to include the cultural and historical area. This site will carry the name "Ohrid region with its cultural and historical aspects and its natural environment".
The Committee furthermore decided not to inscribe the following ten sites on the World Heritage List : No. / Name of property / State Party 104 / Church of Orosi / Costa Rica 105 / National Monument at San Jose / Costa Rica 108 / National Theatre / Costa Rica 110 / Church of Nicoya / Costa Rica 123 / Kainji Lake National Park / Nigeria 56 / Valley of Heidal / Norway 57 / Kjerringøy Trading Centre / Norway 60 / Eidsvoll Building / Norway 141 / Archaeological ruins at Harappa / ...
The Committee decided to enter in the world Heritage List the following 28 sites: No. Name of property State Party 102 Qalaa of Beni Hammad Algeria 124 Historic Town of Ouro Prêto Brazil 133 Burgess Shale Site Canada 79 Paphos Cyprus 10 Lower Valley of the Awash Ethiopia 12 Tiya Ethiopia 5 Aksum Ethiopia 17 Lower Valley of the Omo Ethiopia 35 Ashante Traditional Buildings Ghana 129        Maya Site of Copan Honduras 91 Historic Centre of Rome Italy   The representative ...
The Committee decided furthermore to defer the following sites : No. / Name of property / State Party 101 / Dey's Palace at Algiers/ Algeria 103 / Citadel Quarter of Setif / Algeria 106 /  National archaeological park of Guayabo de Turrialba / Costa Rica 107 / Santa Rosa historic mansion / Costa Rica  109 / Ruins of Ujarras / Costa Rica  11 /  Adulis / Ethiopia 111 / Bale Mountain National Park / Ethiopia 112 / Abijatta Shalla Lakes National Park / Ethiopia  13 / Melka Kontoure / Ethiopia 14 / Matara / Ethiopia 16  /Yeha / Ethiopia 92 / Convent of Santa Giulia-San Salvatore ...
21. The Committee heard the report of the working group set up to examine measures to improve the balance between the cultural and the natural heritage in the implementation of the Convention and agreed with the recommendations set out below: 1) Preparatory assistance to States Parties should be granted on a priority basis for: (i) the establishment of tentative lists of cultural and natural properties situated in their territories and suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List; (ii) the preparation of nominations of types of properties underrepresented in the World Heritage ...
The Committee decided to include in the World Heritage List all the properties recommended by the Bureau. Two nominations, the Fort of Lahore and Shalimar Gardens in Lahore were combined and thus the following twenty-six properties were inscribed : Name of Property Nomination submitted by Id No. Los Glaciares Argentina 145 Kakadu National Park Australia 147 NB The Committee noted that the Australian Government intended to proclaim additional areas in the Alligator River Region as part of Kakadu National Park and recommended that such areas ...
The Committee took note of the decision of the Bureau to defer twenty nominations because additional information was required. The meeting was informed that the Australian Government had withdrawn the nomination of the Sydney Opera House in its setting and that it hoped to submit a revised nomination in due course. In addition, the Rapporteur and the Secretariat informed the Committee that the Algerian Authorities intended to revise the nomination relating to the Dey's Palace at Algiers in order to extend it to cover the whole of the Casbah; this revised nomination would be submitted when ...
Before the Committee examined the nominations to the World Heritage List, a series of slides on some of the cultural and natural properties nominated was shown by ICOMOS and IUCN. The Committee then took up one by one the nominations of those properties which the Bureau had recommended for inclusion in the World Heritage List. In each case the Committee was informed of the point of view of the Bureau as presented by the Rapporteur and took note of the comments of the representatives of ICOMOS and/or IUCN, who had made an evaluation of each property in relation to the criteria for the ...
The Committee decided to enter in the World Heritage List the twenty-four cultural and natural properties which had been recommended by the Bureau: Name of PropertyContracting State having submitted the nomination of the property in accordance with the ConventionIdentification No.  Tassili n'Ajjer  Algeria  179  The M'Zab Valley Algeria  188  Djemila  Algeria  191  Tipasa Algeria  193  Timgad Algeria  194  Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks The Committee is seriously concerned at the ...
The Committee furthermore decided that the site of Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve, which was already included in the World Heritage List on the proposal of Guinea, would be extended through the addition of that part of the Reserve situated in Ivory Coast, which was nominated by that State.
The Committee also decided that the Old Stone Town of Zanzibar which had been nominated by Tanzania should not be considered further for inclusion in the World Heritage List.
The delegate of Italy informed the Committee that the Italian authorities withdraw the nomination of the Medici Villas in the Florentine region.
With respect to the nomination by the Syrian Arab Republic of Aleppo, the Rapporteur recalled the request made by the Bureau that the Syrian authorities should : provide a clear definition of the zones granted absolute protection in Aleppo; and adapt an urbanization policy analogous to that advocated in the report of the Unesco mission to Aleppo. As soon as these additional steps have been taken, the Syrian authorities are invited to inform the Secretariat so that the nomination can be re-examined. This information should reach the Secretariat by the end of February 1983 to enable ...
28. The Rapporteur recalled that the Bureau, on the proposal of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, examined the request for the inclusion of the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" in the List of World Heritage in Danger, and that, since a consensus could not be reached on this nomination, the Bureau declared that "it will be for the Committee, at its sixth session, to take in this respect the decision which in any case has to be taken by the Committee". 29. At the Committee's request, ICOMOS pursued its examination of the file concerning this nomination. In this examination, ICOMOS took ...
The World Heritage Committee, Decides to maintain in the revised Operational Guidelines existing text from the July 2002 Operational Guidelines concerning: reactive monitoring (paragraph 68), the development of a programme of corrective measures (paragraphs 22, 46b, 86, 87 and 89), inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger (paragraphs 80-93) and, possible deletion from the World Heritage List (paragraphs 46-56). Requests the World Heritage Centre to re-order the text in the revised Operational Guidelines to ensure a logical and consistent presentation of the ...
The World Heritage Committee, Requests the World Heritage Centre to ensure that all future publications of the World Heritage List indicate the criteria according to which properties were inscribed on the List using the new numbering system for the combined criteria (i) to (x).
The World Heritage Committee, Takes note of the list of all nominations received by the World Heritage Centre between 28 January 2002 and 1 February 2003 as presented in document WHC-03/6 EXT.COM/7 Rev; Decides that the 32 new nominations determined by the World Heritage Centre to be complete by 1 February 2003 and four additional nominations for which the Centre had asked for guidance from the Committee be transmitted to the Advisory Bodies for evaluation. Requests the World Heritage Centre to assist States Parties who have submitted incomplete nominations to make them complete for ...
9. Mr. Batisse, Assistant Director General (Science Sector) presented the report of the Secretariat and drew attention to the report of the seventh session of the Bureau held on 27-30 June 1983. He noted that since that date, the 4th General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention had taken place on 28 October 1983 during the 22nd session of the Unesco General Conference. As stipulated by the Convention, the mandate of 7 countries expired and the following countries were elected: Algeria, Australia (re-election), Lebanon, Malawi, Norway, Sri Lanka, and Turkey. He indicated that 64 ...
 The Committee examined the nominations to the World Heritage List, taking note of the comments of the representatives of ICOMOS and/or IUCN which had made an evaluation of each property. The Committee decided to enter in the World Heritage List the twenty-nine cultural and natural properties as follows: Contracting State having submitted the nomination of the property in accordance with the ConventionIdentificationName of PropertyCriteria Federal Republic of Germany 271 The Pilgrimage Church of Wies C(i)(iii) Brazil 275 The ruins of Sao Miguel das Missoes It was ...
Rila Monastery 216 Bulgaria C(vi) This property was not considered as a testimony of mediaeval civi­lisation but rather as a symbol of the 19th Century Bulgarian Renaissance which imparted slavic cultural values upon Rila in trying to re-establish an uninterrupted historical continuity. The reconstruction of Rila (1834­-1962) thus illustrates cultural criterion (vi) of the Operational Guidelines.
Wood Buffalo National Park 256 Canada N(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee drew attention to the harmful consequences that the eventual construction of a dam on the Slave River could have on those natural characte­ristics which make the property of outstanding universal value. It therefore recommended that the Canadian authorities take all possible measures to protect the integrity of the site.
Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves 205 Costa Rica N(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee reiterated the Bureau's wish that the Panamanian authorities take the initiative of nominating the part of the Friendship (Amistad) Park located in their territory.
Comoe National Park 227 Ivory Coast N(ii)(iv) The Committee recommended that the authorities should consider extending the protected area to include Mts. Gorowi and Kongoli thus enhancing the ecological and touristic value of this property.
Church of Saint-Savin-sur-Gartempe 230 France C(i)(iii) It was noted that this property becomes part of the series of important groups of Romanesque mural paintings.
Ajanta Caves 242 India C(i)(ii)(iii)(vi) The Committee recommended that the authorities take all possible safeguarding measures, especially as concerns constructions on the summit of the cliff which could be detrimental for the site.
Sites: Ajanta Caves
Ellora Caves 243 India C(i)(iii)(vi) The Committee recommended that the authorities establish a protection zone which would safeguard the surrounding land­scape and the cliff, and provide a map indicating the delimitation of this zone.
Sites: Ellora Caves
Agra Fort 251 India C(iii) The Committee recommended that the authorities create a buffer zone of protection between the Fort and the Taj Mahal so as to safeguard the landscape and the environment between these two quite different monuments.
Sites: Agra Fort
30. Following the recommendations of its Bureau, the Committee decided to defer examination of the nominations which are listed below until it receives the necessary information: Contracting State having submitted the nomination of the property in accordance with the Convention Identification n° Name of Property Afghanistan 207 The City and Monuments of Herat Afghanistan 211 The Minaret of Jam Ghana 226 Bia National Park Ghana 279 Traditional Mosques of Northern Ghana India 234 Churches and Convents of Goa Iraq 276 Ancient ...
28. The Committee noted that the nominations of the Church of St. Elizabeth of Marburg and the Hanseatic City of Lubeck (Federal Republic of Germany), as well as the nomination of the Palais des Papes, the Old Cathedral of Notre-Dame-des­Doms, Pont Saint-Benezet and ramparts of Avignon (France) had been withdrawn.  
32. The Committee also decided not to include the Ancient City of Plovdiv nominated by Bulgaria on the World Heritage List. The Committee considered it was difficult at this stage to include urban sites on the List for their vernacular architecture and that the problems concerning the types of towns characteristic of the different regions of the world would first have to be clarified.
12. Mr. da Silva Telles (Brazil), Rapporteur of the previous Bureau, presented the report of the eighth session of the Bureau held on 4-7 June 1984. He furthermore presented a report of the complementary meeting of the Bureau which had taken place on 29 October prior to the eighth session of the Committee itself. This complementary Bureau meeting aimed first of all at considering the conclusions of a group of experts brought together by ICOMOS to study the criteria applicable to historic towns and secondly examining the nominations of the historic centres of Quebec, Canada (N° 300) ...
15. Noting that ICOMOS had been unable, between 7 September and 28 October 1984, to process the nominations of Quebec (N° 300) and Salvador (N° 309) in accordance with its normal procedure, the Committee decided to defer the consideration of those nominations until the 1985 session of the Bureau.
21. The Rapporteur, Mr. Chabason, brought up the question of mixed cultural/natural properties and particularly of rural landscapes, which meet criterion (iii) for natural sites as "exceptional combinations of natural and cultural elements". Mr. Chabason described three types of problems connected with such properties. The first was the question of identification of exceptionally harmonious, beautiful, man-made landscapes as epitomised by the terraced rice-fields of S.E. Asia, the terraced fields of the Mediterranean Basin or by certain vineyard areas in Europe. In this respect, criterion ...
25. The Committee examined the nominations to the World Heritage List, taking account of the Bureau's recommendations and of the evaluations of ICOMOS and IUCN for each property. The Committee decided to enter 23 cultural and natural properties on the World Heritage List which are presented in List A below. The Committee decided to defer a decision on four nominations presented in List B below. Finally, the Committee decided not to inscribe the eight properties presented in List C below.
Jesuit Missions of the Guaranis  291 Argentina C(iv) Under this name, the Committee decided to include jointly in the World Heritage List, along with Sao Miguel das Missoes, in Brazil (which is already included), the four missions nominated by Argentina, i.e. San Ignacio Mini, Santa Ana, Nuestra Senora de Loreto and Santa Maria la Mayor. It considered it would be desirable that certain missions located in Paraguay and Uruguay also be included in the World Heritage List, so that the whole group of monuments might provide a representative illustration of the Jesuit missions of the ...
Iguazu National Park 303 Argentina N(iii)(iv) The Committee noted with satisfaction that the Argentine authorities firmly intend to expand the area of the Park and to complete the management plan in conformity with IUCN's recommendations. The Committee was furthermore glad to be informed by the representative of Brazil that the contiguous Iguacu National Park, on the Brazilian side of the river, would be nominated by the end of 1984 so that both parks could constitute next year a transfrontier World Heritage ...
Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks 304 Canada N(i)(ii)(iii) The Committee requested the Canadian authorities to consider adding the adjacent Provincial Parks of Mount Robson, Hamber, Mount Assiniboine and Kananskis to this property. Furthermore, the Committee agreed to incorporate the Burgess Shale site in this property, which henceforth would not be separately indicated on the World Heritage List. Finally, the Committee decided that the site be designated as the "Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks" to specify the precise boundary of the property within the entire chain of the Rocky ...
Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena 285 Colombia C(iv)(vi) Noting that the monuments and architectural ensembles included in the List were located within the unique natural setting of the bay of Cartagena, the Committee also recommended that the bay be given the best protection possible.
Anjar 293 Lebanon C(iii)(iv) The Committee wished that strict protection be given not only to the intra-muros vestiges but also to the building with a central courtyard extra-muros in the east which had been brought to light. It also suggested that the surroundings of the site, where a modern village was being developed, be strictly protected.
Sites: Anjar
Baalbek 294 Lebanon C(i)(iv) The Committee, when inscribing this property, expressed the wish that the protected area include the entire town within the Arab walls as well as the south-western quarter extra­-muros between Bastan-al-Khan, the Roman works and the Mameluk mosque of Ras-al-Ain. During the discussion, the representative of Lebanon assured the Committee that the authorities of this country would follow these ...
Sites: Baalbek
Tyre 299 Lebanon C(iii)(vi) The Committee decided to inscribe this site such as it was defined in the plan submitted by the Lebanese authorities. The Committee furthermore requested the Lebanese authorities to give details on the type of protection given within and around the zones of protection indicated on the plan as uncontrolled urban development should not destroy the old city.
Sites: Tyre
Byblos 295 Lebanon C(iii)(iv)(vi) The Committee wished that this site be included in a wide area of protection, encompassing besides the ancient habitat, the medieval city within the walls and the area of the necropoles.
Sites: Byblos
Lake Malawi National Park 289 Malawi N(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee was informed that the Malawi authorities had agreed to the Bureau's recommendation to consider extending the area of the National Park. The Committee,   however, recommended that the Malawi authorities officially adopt and implement the management plan that had been prepared for the Park and to continue research on the Park's natural resources.
Royal Chitwan National Park 284 Nepal N(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee noted that there was only a remote possibility that the proposed pulp mills be constructed on the Narayani River but requested that the Nepalese authorities keep it informed of any developments in this respect which could affect the Park.
The Alhambra and the Generalife, Granada 314 Spain C(i)(iii)(iv) The Committee expressed the wish that, as indicated by the Spanish authorities, a large protection zone will ensure that the visual environment of this property will not be harmed by modern constructions.
Monastery and Site of the Escurial, Madrid 318 Spain C(i)(ii)(vi) The Committee called the Spanish authorities' attention to the importance of strictly protecting the natural environment which is inseparable from this monument.
Yosemite National Park 308 United States of America N(i)(ii)(iii) In response to the Bureau's request on clarification of the status of the proposed dam constructions in proximity of this property, the Committee noted that the authorities had assured that the implementation of such proposals was highly unlikely. The Committee nevertheless requested to be informed by the American authorities of any developments in this respect which could affect the Park. It also noted with interest that the relevant authorities had the intention to implement a programme to reduce the impact of ...
Salonga National Park 280 Zaire N(ii)(iii) The Committee requested the Zaire authorities to proceed as soon as possible to prepare and implement a management plan for the Park with due regard to creating an appropriate corridor linking the two sectors of the National Park.
Mana Pools National Park, Sapi and Chewore Safari Areas 302 Zimbabwe N(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee requested to be kept informed by the Zimbabwian authorities of the possible construction of a new dam on the Zambezi at Mapata Gorge. The Committee also requested the Zambian authorities to consider nominating the adjacent Lower Zambezi National Park in order to eventually constitute a joint inscription on the World Heritage List.
The Historic Mosque City of Bagerhat 321 Bangladesh The Committee decided to defer the inscription of the property until the authorities of Bangladesh had given the assurances which the Bureau had requested at its eighth session with regard to: - the highway which is now planned to traverse this site and which could be re-routed as suggested by ICOMOS; - the elaboration of a preservation and management plan along the lines of the conclusions of the Unesco mission which took place in ...
Ruins of the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur 322 Bangladesh The Committee decided to defer the inscription of this property until the Bangladesh authorities had given assurances concerning the application of the measures proposed by the same Unesco mission, particularly with a view to avoiding the installation of mining industries in the proximity of the monastery.
Prehistoric Rock-art Sites of Tadrart Acacus 287 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya The examination of this nomination was deferred at the request of the representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
Sidon 297 Lebanon The Committee deferred the examination of this nomination pending a response from the Lebanese government to the Bureau's request to nominate only the Sanctuary of Echmun.
Archaeological Park of Guayabo de Turrialba 106 Costa Rica The Committee considered that in its current state, this site did not fulfil the criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List. A new nomination could be presented in the event that the excavations (which will no doubt need to be continued for a considerable time) produce results of exceptional universal interest.
Archaeological Site of Ptolemais (Tolmeita) 301 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya The Committee, while taking account of the great importance of this site for the Libyan national heritage, felt that it did not fulfil the criteria of "outstanding universal value" -as understood by the World Heritage Committee.
Tripoli 298 Lebanon The Committee asked to draw the Government's attention to the fact that urbanisation and factory pollution were threatening this site which, although it does not fulfil the World Heritage criteria, is of great value in the Lebanese national Heritage.
Deir el-Qamar and Beit Ed-Dine 296 Lebanon The Committee, while taking account of the great importance of this site for the Lebanese national heritage, felt that it did not fulfil the criteria of "outstanding universal value" as understood by the World Heritage Committee.
Nyika National Park 290 Malawi Although this property does not fulfil the World Heritage criteria of outstanding universal value, the Committee however noted the importance of this property on the national and regional levels.
Rani Kot Fort (Kirthar National Park) 176 Pakistan The Committee, while taking account of the great importance of this site for the Pakistani national Heritage, felt that it did not fulfil the criteria of "outstanding universal value" as understood by the World Heritage Committee.
Maiko National Park 281 Zaire The Committee noted that the natural features of this property were well represented in other World Heritage properties and that the criterion of integrity was not fulfilled. Although this property does not meet the criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List, the Committee recommended that the Zaire authorities take all the necessary steps to safeguard this highly valuable site which constitutes one of the largest tracts of primary forest remaining in ...
Kundelungu National Park 283 Zaire This park did not meet World Heritage criteria and its integrity was in doubt. The committee however recommended that the Zairois authorities be encouraged to strengthen the protection of this very important park.
14. Introducing agenda item 6, the Secretariat recalled the Bureau's proposals as contained in the report of the ninth session. It was pointed out that, in addition to the question of the growing number of nominations, the real problem raised by development of the Convention was that of monitoring the status of conservation of properties included on the List. 15. In regard to the Bureau's proposed measures to reduce the number of nominations to be processed each year, the Committee was of the view that it was preferable not to lay down strict rules but rather to appeal to States that ...
25. The representative of IUCN recalled that this question had been first raised at the eighth session of the Committee at Buenos Aires (Argentina) in 1984 and that the Committee had requested IUCN to consult with ICOMOS and the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA) to organise a task force on this subject. The meeting of this task force had taken place at the headquarters of ICOMOS (Paris) on 11 October 1985. 26. The representative of IUCN presented document SC-85/CONF.008/3, which summarized the main points of discussion of the task force and its conclusions, ...
29. The Committee examined 37 nominations to the World Heritage List, taking account of the Bureau's recommendations, and of the evaluations of ICOMOS and IUCN for each property. The Committee decided to include 30 culturaland natural properties on the World Heritage List. These are presented under section A below. The Committee decided to defer its decision on the two nominations presented under section B, and not to include the four properties presented under section C. Section D covers one property whose nomination has been withdrawn.
The historic mosque city of Bagerhat   321 Bangladesh C(iv) The Committee recommended to the Bangladesh authorities that they pursue a preservation and management plan in accordance with the conclusions of the Unesco mission sent to the site in 1983.
Royal palaces of Abomey 323 Benin  C(iii)(iv) The Committee stressed the importance of careful restoration in order to preserve the authenticity of the property.
Sanctuary of Bom Jesus do Congonhas 334 Brazil C(i)(iv) The Committee expressed the wish that the integrity of this site be preserved, in particular      by ensuring that it is surrounded by a large protection zone, and noted with satisfaction a statement by the Mayor of Congonhas giving assurances that the relevant authorities would take strict care to preserve its surroundings.
Quebec (Historic area) 300 Canada C(iv)(vi) The Mayor of Quebec thanked the Committee for this inscription on the World Heritage List, pointing out that such an event would provide considerable support to the various Canadian authorities concerned, who will pursue their efforts to preserve the site.
Pont du Gard (Roman aqueduct) 344 France C(i)(iii)(iv) The Committee drew the attention of the French authorities to the importance of strictly protecting the site's surroundings.
Kaziranga National Park 337 India N(ii)(iv) The Committee encouraged the Indian authorities to provide a legal basis to protect the buffer zone south of the Park (Mikir Hills and the Karbi Plateau). The Committee expressed concern over the proposed construction of a railway along the southern boundary of the park and asked that environmental impact studies be carried out.
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary 338 India N(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee expressed its satisfaction that the Indian and Bhutanese governments had cancelled plans for the construction of a hydro-electric dam on the Manas River which would have had severe impacts on the integrity of this property. The Committee furthermore encouraged the Government of Bhutan to adhere to the World Heritage Conven­tion and to nominate the contiguous Manas Wildlife Sanctuary in Bhutan which could then form a transfrontier World Heritage ...
Petra 326 Jordan C(i)(iii)(iv) The Committee noted that the boundaries of the site corresponded to those of the Petra National Park.
Sites: Petra
Rock-art sites of Tadrart Acacus 287 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya C(iii) The Committee noted the statement of the representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by which he expressed his agreement with the amendment to the report of the 9th session of the Bureau presented by the representative of Algeria and indicating notably that scientific and technical co-ordination between their two countries for the protection of Tadrart Acacus and Tassili N'Ajjer would be possible.
The Medina of Marrakesh 331 Morocco C(i)(ii)(iv)(v) The Committee recommended that the Moroccan authorities ensure that Marrakesh conserve its exceptional character as a fully preserved historic town. In this connection it would be advisable to avoid any breaching of the ramparts, to protect carefully the medina and especially the facades of its buildings and its gardens, and also to ensure the protection of the surroundings of Marrakesh, in particular the palm grove, the Menara and the gardens of Bab Djedid, by strictly enforcing the management plan adopted in ...
Huascaran National Park 333 Peru N(ii)(iii) The Committee wished to point out to the Peruvian authorities that the inscription concerned only the Huascaran National Park. The Committee, furthermore, encouraged the Peruvian authorities to intensify their efforts in the management of the Park, and particularly to update the management plan.
Göreme National Park and the rock sites of Cappadocia 357 Turkey C(i)(iii)(v) N(iii) The Committee encouraged the Turkish authorities to proceed with the legal formalities for the setting up of a Göreme National Park.
Iguaçu National Park 355 Brazil The Committee noted that the Bureau had recommended the inscription of this property and had suggested that it could be considered as a single transfrontier property along with the contiguous Iguazu National Park in Argentina, inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1984. The Secretariat informed the Committee that the Brazilian authorities had requested the Committee to postpone the examination of this nomination. The representative of Brazil explained that the authorities wished to study the points raised by the Bureau in its report. It was ...
Jerash 324 Jordan The Committee decided to defer inscription of the property pending receipt of information on the exact boundaries of the proposed site, a management plan and assurances regarding the restoration policy, which should be compatible with universally accepted standards. The Committee was of the view that an ICOMOS mission should visit Jerash to discuss these matters with the Jordanian authorities and that a nomination duly completed should be submitted at the Bureau's next session.
Coco Island National Park 329 Costa Rica The Committee recognized the interest of this property for its flora, and its importance in the Costa Rican context, but felt that it did not fulfill criteria established by the World Heritage Committee for inclusion in the World Heritage List.
Abbey of St. Nicolas de Tolentin de Brou 346 France While recognizing the great importance of this site, the Committee was of the opinion that there were more representative examples of late Gothic architecture.
Tabaqat Fahl (Pella) 328 Jordan While recognizing the great importance of this site, the Committee considered that there were more representative examples of the various categories of property with which Pella is associated (neolithic vestiges, Greco-Roman cities, monuments of the Omayyad and Mameluke periods).
Kerak Castle325JordanWhile recognizing the great importance of this site, the Committee was of the opinion that there were more representative examples of crusader castles. It also asked that ICOMOS conduct a comparative study on this type of property.
The representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya informed the Committee of the withdrawal of the nomination of the archaeological site of the city of Ptolemais.  
Chan Chan Archaeological Zone 366 Peru C(i)(iii)       On the recommendation of the Bureau and following a request from the Peruvianauthorities, the Committee also decided to inscribe Chan Chan archaeological zoneon the List of World Heritage in Danger. In so doing, the Committee recommendedthat appropriate measures be taken for the conservation, restoration andmanagement of the site and specifically that the excavation work on the site behalted unless it was accompanied by appropriate conservation measures and thatall possible steps be taken to ...
Australian East Coast Temperate and Sub-Tropical Rain Forest Parks 368 Australia N(i)(ii) The Australian authorities, by letter of 9 October 1986 to the Secretariat, agreed to the two conditions recommended by the Bureau for the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List. The first of these was to exclude the Mt. Dromedary Flora Reserve from the nominated areas and the second concerned the changing of the name of this property. The name given above and suggested by the Australian authorities was considered appropriate by the Committee. In relation to the Bureau's ...
Iguaçu National Park 355 Brazil N(iii)(iv) In response to the Secretariat's request for advice on the future listing of this property, the delegation of Brazil indicated its wish to list this property independently, as proposed by Brazil, without any link to the concept of transfrontier site or any other similar concept in force or that might be accepted in the deliberations of the Committee. The Delegation of Brazil also mentioned that Brazilian legislation did not allow for any commitment regarding joint management of national parks. The World Heritage Committee, although it ...
Monuments of Trier 367 Germany (Fed. Rep. of) C(i)(iii)(iv)(vi) The Committee was informed of plans to use the amphitheatre in Trier for entertainment purposes and it requested the Chairman to write to the authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany to express its reservations on the plans as at present conceived which risked to prejudice the authenticity and integrity of the monument.
Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae 392 Greece C(i)(ii)(iii) The Committee took note of the statement made by the Greek autho­rities that the area surrounding the temple was controlled by the Ministry of Culture and that no construction of any sort (roads or buildings) was allowed in that area.
Westland and Mount Cook National Park 375 New Zealand N(i)(ii)(iii) The Committee expressed its satisfaction regarding the manner in which the management plans drawn up for the two national parks have addressed the question of aircraft use. The Committee requested the State Party to keep it informed of any changes in the legal status of the recently added lands in Westland National Parks.
Fiordland National Park 376 New Zealand N(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee noted the importance of including the waters of the fiords as an integral part of this national park and requested the New Zealand authorities to keep it informed of any reconside­ration of the proposal to export fresh water from the area which has been currently withdrawn. The Committee welcomed the initiatives of the New Zealand authorities to bring the waters of the fiords under the control of the park and endorsed the efforts of the New Zealand Wildlife Service to rehabilitate takahe habitat and restore ...
Chan Chan archaeological zone 366 Peru C(i)(iii) On the recommendation o f the Bureau and following a request from the Peruvian authorities, the Committee also decided to inscribe Chan Chan archaeological zone on the List of World Heritage in Danger. In so doing, the Committee recommended that appropriate measures be taken for the conservation, restoration and management of the site and specifically that the excavation work on the site be halted unless it was accompanied by appropriate conservation measures and that all possible steps be taken to control the plundering of the ...
Garajonay National Park 380 Spain N(ii)(iii) The Committee commended the efforts of the Spanish authorities and local people in restoring and maintaining the conservation values of this site and wished to encourage initiatives to extend the boundaries of the park and to undertake further ecosystem research work.
Ancient City of Aleppo 21 Syrian Arab Republic C(iii)(iv) The Committee considered that it would be important to re-examine the situation of the old city at one of its future sessions to ascertain whether inclusion in the List of World Heritage in Danger would then be warranted.
Hattusha 377 Turkey C(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) The Committee noted that the management plan prepared by a German archaeological team had the approval of the Turkish authorities and that it was expected that steps at present underway to proclaim Bogazköy and Alacahöyük as a National Park would be completed before the end of 1987.
The Giant's Causeway and Causeway Coast 369 United Kingdom N(i)(iii) The Committee was informed by the observer from United Kingdom that this property was expected to be declared a National Nature Reserve within the next few weeks.
Stonehenge, Avebury and associated sites 373 United Kingdom C(i)(ii)(iii) The Committee noted with satisfaction the assurances provided by the authorities of the United Kingdom that the closure of the road which crosses the avenue at Stonehenge was receiving serious consideration as part of the overall plans for the future management of the site.
St. Kilda 387 United Kingdom N(iii)(iv) The Committee was informed of the proposals to expand the radio tracking facilities on Hirta Island and was satisfied with the decision of the Secretary of State for Scotland, acting in concertation with local nature conservation authorities, to take appropriate measures concerning the siting, size, and colouring of these facilities which would minimise their impact on the nature conservation values. Given the high value of the marine area surrounding the archipelago of St. Kilda, any proposal in the future by the authorities of the United ...
Sites: St Kilda
Old City of Sana'a 385 Yemen C(iv)(v)(vi) The Committee recommended that an adequate buffer zone should be established around the old city. It noted that the set of municipal regulations recently drawn up had now been adopted.
Skocjan Caves 390 Yugoslavia N(ii)(iii) The Committee noted that the area inscribed on the World Heritage List included the underground chamber of the Hanke Canal extending in the direction of Druskovec. As concerns the integrity of the property, the Committee congratulated the Yugoslav authorities on the recent important measures taken to halt the industrial pollution of the undergroung Reka River and to strengthen protective measures for controlling land use on the land above the caves and particularly the entrance ...
Great Zimbabwe National Monument 364 Zimbabwe C(i)(iii)(vi) The Committee recommended that measures should be studied o f strengthening the surveying, restoration and maintenance programme on the site (photogrammetry of the stone walls, mapping of the site, clearance of the trees on top of the walls, support for the collapsing walls).
Khami Ruins National Monument 365 Zimbabwe C(iii)(iv) The Committee shared the concerns expressed by ICOMOS on the state of preservation of the site which was seriously deteriorating due to the climatic conditions and the encroaching vegetation. It recommended that the state of the site be carefully followed and recognized that inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger may be warranted. The Committee expressed its willingness to provide help for the safeguarding of the ...
Kakadu National Park (Stage II) 147 Australia The leader of the Australian Delegation requested permission to put before the World Heritage Committee an order of the Federal Court of Australia. He read this in full to the Committee and then made it available to delegates. The Australian Delegation then requested the World Heritage Committee to defer, until further notice, the consideration of State II of the Kakadu National Park as part of the Kakadu World Heritage Property already inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1981. The Committee agreed. The representative of IUCN noted that ...
12. The Committee examined 32 nominations to the World Heritage List, taking account of the recommendations of the Bureau and of the comments of ICOMOS and IUCN on each property (document CC-86/CONF.003/3). The Committee decided to include 31 cultural and natural properties on the World Heritage List and to extend a site already listed.
9. The Committee examined 61 nominations to the World Heritage List, taking account of the recommendations of ICOMOS and IUCN for each nomination. The Committee decided to include 41 cultural and natural properties on the World Heritage List and one extension, which are presented in section A below. The Committee also decided to defer its decision on 16 nominations, as noted under section B, and decided not to include 4 properties on the World Heritage List (section C). Finally, the Committee noted that the United Kingdom had withdrawn the nominations of Diana's Peak and High Peak, St. ...
Kakadu National Park(extension to include Stage II) 147 Australia N(ii)(iii)(iv) C(iii) The Committee recalled that at its 5th session held in Sydney (Australia) in 1981, while inscribing Kakadu National Park on the World Heritage List, it had noted that the Australian Government intended to proclaim additional areas in the Alligator River Region as part of Kakadu National Park and had recommended that such areas be included in the site inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee therefore welcomed the extension of the site to include such areas, which had been favourably ...
Uluru National Park 447 Australia N(ii) (iii) The Committee commended the Australian authorities on the manner in which the management of this property gave an appropriate blend of the cultural and natural characteristics of this property. The Committee expressed the view that the site could be extended to include areas which would give a more complete representation of the arid zone and encouraged the Australian authorities to continue their efforts to reintroduce previously occurring native ...
Brasilia 445 Brazil C(i)(iv) The Committee recommended that a conservation policy which respects the characteristics of the urban creation of 1956 be pursued in the federal district of Brasilia.
Sites: Brasilia
Mount Taishan 437 China (People's Rep. of) C(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi) N(iii) The Committee took note with satisfaction of the assurances given by the observer from China. They responded to the preoccupations of the Bureau which was concerned by the proliferation of buildings and tourism installations. The Committee endorsed the recommendations of the Bureau and requested that particular care be taken in developing this unique site.
Sites: Mount Taishan
Mogao Caves 440 China (People's Rep. of) C(i)(ii)(iii) (iv) (v) (vi) The Committee drew the attention of the Chinese authorities to the need to take all necessary measures to safeguard the very vulnerable rock site of Mogao Caves. The Committee would like to be kept informed of all action undertaken to this end.
The Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor 441 China (People's Rep. of) C(i)(iii)(iv)(vi) The Committee would like to be informed by the Chinese authorities of the plans for the archaeological exploration, presentation and management of the site.
Dja Faunal Reserve 407 Cameroon N(ii)(iv) The Committee strongly encouraged the Cameroon authorities to continue the process to upgrade the legal status of this reserve to strengthen its protection, and also to adopt and implement the draft management plan prepared by the GarouaCollege. The Committee encouraged the Cameroon authorities to continue detailed surveys of the flora and fauna and to increase the documentation on the natural resources. Finally, the Committee also requested the Cameroon authorities to ensure that the planning of the trans-­african highway would take into ...
Hanseatic City of Lübeck 272 Rev Germany (Fed. Rep. of) C(iv) The Committee recommended that the archaeological exploitation under the historic city of Lübeck be pursued, including in the zones not inscribed on the World Heritage List, and wished to be kept informed.
top