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

Gelati Monastery

Georgia
Factors affecting the property in 2007*
  • Management activities
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:

    General need for interior and exterior conservation work on the monuments

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) General need for interior and exterior conservation work on the monuments;

b) Insufficient coordination between the Georgian Church and the national authorities;

c) Lack of co-ordinated management system;

d) Major reconstruction of the structure of Bagrati Cathedral.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2007
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2007**

UNESCO/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission from 8 to 16 November 2003.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2007

The World Heritage Committee at its 29th session (Durban, 2005) encouraged the State Party to take appropriate measures, including seeking of funds, to address conservation issues identified in the state of conservation report.

The Ministry of Cultural Affairs of Georgia submitted a report on 12 March 2007 to the World Heritage Centre, dated January 2007. This report provides a comprehensive overview of all the issues relevant to the long term conservation of the property. This detailed report includes a proposal by the State Party for a new statement of significance, a statement of authenticity/integrity, a description of the situation for management, detailed monitoring reports concerning the physical condition of frescoes and materials within the two ensembles, and recently completed conservation work and studies addressing some of the problems identified.

More specifically, the report proposes a new approach to the justification of the property, including: nomination under two additional criteria, (i) and (ii), but without justification as well as a statement of authenticity/integrity not fully in compliance with the Operational Guidelines.

Concerning the lack of a management plan for the two properties, unresolved management conflict between Church and State and the physical state of conservation of the two ensembles the report provides observations included already its report of January 2005. The Committee’s request (29 COM 7B.75) is not addressed in the State Party report. Indeed, all of the problems described at the time appear still in place, and in most cases worsened by the passage of time without positive treatment.

The current report also notes that the major reconstruction project for the structure of the Bagrati Cathedral, first questioned at the 28th session of the Committee (Suzhou, 2004), is no longer being considered.

The World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS express their concern about the increasing gravity of the physical situation described of the two ensembles, the continuing inability of the State Party to provide the necessary management, and institutional conditions necessary to ensure the long-term survival of these monuments, and for the apparent failure to secure the necessary financial support to address previously defined problems. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2007
31 COM 7B.97
Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery (Georgia)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.75, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Regrets the late submission of the state of conservation report but notes the efforts of the State Party in reviewing the values, integrity and authenticity of the property;

4. Expresses serious concern about the continuing urgency of the problems described by the State Party report, and its inability to respond to these issues with appropriate managerial, institutional and financial measures;

5. Encourages the State Party to prepare, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS/ICCROM a 5 year work programme designed to address the major problems identified, for presentation to potential donors;

6. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission to assess the state of conservation of the property;

7. Strongly urges the State Party to initiate preparation of an integrated management plan for the World Heritage property, with the assistance of the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;

8. Also requests the State Party to provide a progress report to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

Draft Decision: 31 COM 7B.97

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.75, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Regrets the late submission of the state of conservation report but notes the efforts of the State Party in reviewing the values, integrity and authenticity of the property;

4. Expresses serious concern about the continuing urgency of the problems described by the State Party report, and its inability to respond to these issues with appropriate managerial, institutional and financial measures;

5. Encourages the State Party to prepare, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies a 5 year work programme designed to address the major problems identified, for presentation to potential donors;

6. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission to assess the state of conservation of the property;

7. Strongly urges the State Party to initiate preparation of an integrated management plan for the World Heritage property, with the assistance of the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;

8. Also requests the State Party provide a progress report to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008. 

Report year: 2007
Georgia
Date of Inscription: 1994
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iv)
Danger List (dates): 2010-2017
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 31COM (2007)
Exports

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top