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

Natural and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor

Montenegro
Factors affecting the property in 2007*
  • Earthquake
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Housing
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) Earthquake damage;

b) Lack of management planning;

c) Urban development and urban pressure. 

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2007

Total amount provided to the property: USD 46,000 (and Participation Programme 2002-04, USD 47,000).

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2007
Requests approved: 2 (from 1979-1982)
Total amount approved : 70,000 USD
1982 Equipment for the Institute for the Protection of ... (Approved)   50,000 USD
1979 Emergency assistance for the natural and ... (Approved)   20,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2007**

UNESCO/ICOMOS mission 2003

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2007

The World Heritage Committee did not examine the report on the state of conservation of the World Heritage property of Kotor at its 30th session.By its notification of succession dated 26 April 2007, the Republic of Montenegro is a party to the World Heritage Convention as from 3 June 2006.

The State Party submitted a progress report at the end of January 2006, which addresses both progress in the preparation of the management plan for the World Heritage property, and the impact of the proposed bridge at the Verige Strait at the entrance of the Bay of Kotor.

The State Party noted delays in preparing the management plan launched three years ago. In essence because of changes in personnel involved in preparing the plan, efforts to prepare it have slowed down considerably. In general, it seems that earlier efforts have been abandoned and the process of preparing the plan restarted recently. The State Party designated the Regional Institute for the Protection of the Cultural Heritage of Kotor as the agency responsible for the preparation of the management plan in October 2005, with the expectation that work be launched by 31 January 2006 and be completed by 1 July 2006. The State Party report referred to a workshop carried out by ICCROM/UNESCO-BRESCE in January 2006 intended to define the process to be followed in preparing the management plan. The aim of the training workshop was to introduce the principles, practices, and planning methodologies that guide the preparation of a management plan, with specific reference to the Kotor World Heritage property. The workshop concluded with a plan of action for the local authority to complete the plan and a new proposed deadline for completion of 1 February 2007. Subsequently, the Management Plan of Kotor was submitted to the World Heritage Centre and transmitted to ICOMOS for review.

The analysis of the proposed Verige Bridge in the State Party report indicated some ambivalence about the proposed routing. The State Party report suggested that a UNESCO expert mission be organised to look closely at alternatives and potential impacts.

The World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS were pleased to see the involvement of ICCROM in the January 2006 workshop to assist, redefine and redirect the management planning process, which was successfully completed in 2007. Following considerable concern about the decision to build the Verige Bridge, and its proposed location, the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS suggest that a mission be sent to the property to examine the suitability of the proposed bridge at Verige. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2007
31 COM 7B.100
Natural and Culturo-historical Region of Kotor (Montenegro)

The World Heritage Committee,

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

2.       Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.84, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3.       Noting with appreciation the results of the January 2006 workshop to assist in the management planning process and the collaboration between the State Party, ICOMOS, ICCROM, the World Heritage Centre and the UNESCO Venice Office;

4.       Acknowledging the finalization of the site management plan by the State Party in 2007;

5.       Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission with natural heritage expertise to the property to examine the suitability of the proposed bridge at Verige and its impacts on the cultural and landscape values of the property;

6.       Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with a state of conservation report on the property and a progress report on the implementation of the management plan by 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

Draft Decision: 31 COM 7B.100

The World Heritage Committee,

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

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.84, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Noting with appreciation the results of the January 2006 workshop to assist in the management planning process and the collaboration between the State Party, ICOMOS, ICCROM, the World Heritage Centre and the UNESCO Venice Office,

4. Acknowledging the finalization of the site management plan by the State Party in 2007,

5. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission with natural heritage expertise to the property to examine the suitability of the proposed bridge at Verige and its impacts on the cultural and landscape values of the property;

6. Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with a state of conservation report on the property and a progress report on the implementation of the management plan by 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

Report year: 2007
Montenegro
Date of Inscription: 1979
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(ii)(iii)(iv)
Danger List (dates): 1979-2003
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