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

Tipasa

Algeria
Factors affecting the property in 2004*
  • Financial resources
  • Human resources
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:

    State of conservation of mosaics and other exposed structures

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Urban Pressure;
  • Tourism Pressure;
  • Lack of capacity in conservation techniques;
  • Lack of management mechanism (including legislation);
  • Lack of Presentation and interpretation;
  • Lack of human or financial resources;
  • Lack of institution coordination;
  • Looting/Theft


Corrective Measures for the property

(a) The immediate delimitation of the official perimeter of the World Heritage property and its buffer zone, based on the existing archaeological studies, and the issuing of a temporary decree freezing all constructions within these boundaries,

(b)The establishment of a plan, including a timeframe, to relocate families presently living within the property, outside the perimeter of the property, in consultation with the interested parties and local authorities, 

(c) The strengthening of the human and financial resources of the local Inspectorate, possibly providing it with an annual operational budget (excluding staff and running costs) equivalent to US$ 50,000,

(d) The repairing of the roofing of the storages, which are today in a critical state of conservation, and where important objects are kept,

(e) Urgent preventive conservation measures for mosaics and other exposed structures, including a more effective visitor control,

(f) The adoption of the bylaws of the National Antiquities Law of 1998 and the quick elaboration and implementation of the safeguarding and interpretation plan of the property to replace the existing urban instruments,

(g) The preparation, in the above framework, of a management plan for the property, also in consultation with the World Heritage Centre

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2004
Requests approved: 6 (from 1989-2001)
Total amount approved : 75,900 USD
Missions to the property until 2004**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2004

At its 27th session, the World Heritage Committee requested the State Party to submit a report to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2004, on progress achieved on the recommendations elaborated following the Centre's mission in September 2002, which were as follows:

a)   The immediate delimitation of the official perimeter of the World Heritage site and its buffer zone, based on the existing archaeological studies, and the issuing of a temporary official Decree freezing all constructions within those boundaries;
b)   The establishment of a plan, including a timeframe, to relocate approximately 100 families presently living within the perimeter of the property, in consultation with them and with the local authorities;
c)   The strengthening of the human and financial resources of the local Inspectorate, possibly providing it with an annual operational budget (excluding staff and running costs), if possible equivalent to US$50,000;
d)   The repairing of the roofing of the storages, which are currently in a critical condition, and where important objects are kept;
e)  Urgent preventive conservation measures for mosaics and other exposed structures, including more effective visitor control;
f)   The adoption of a legal text on the "protection and presentation of archaeological sites and their buffer zones" and the elaboration of a plan that establishes the construction, architecture, urban-planning and land-use regulations for the Tipasa site, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre;
g)   The preparation, in the above framework, of a Management Plan for the site, also in consultation with the Centre.

While drafting the present report, no information had reached the World Heritage Centre yet from the officials responsible for implementing the above-mentioned recommendations.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2004
28 COM 15A.16
Tipasa (Algeria)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Commending and congratulating the State Party for the steps taken to enhance the protection of the property, and notably for having established a plan aiming at the relocation of the families presently living within the property and for having repaired the roofing of the storages,

2. Considering, however, that further action is required to ensure the full safeguarding of the property,

3. Strongly encourages the State Party to pursue its efforts towards the protection of Tipasa and, to enable the Committee to consider the possible removal of the property from the World Heritage List in Danger, to implement the remaining steps indicated in the recommendations made by the Committee at its 27th session and contained in Decision 27 COM 7A.17, and in particular:
a) the immediate delimitation of the official perimeter of the World Heritage property and its buffer zone, based on the existing archaeological studies, and the issuing of a temporary official decree freezing all constructions within those boundaries;

b) the provision of a timeframe with regard to the plan established for the relocation of approximately 100 families presently living within the perimeter of the property, in consultation with them and with the local authorities;

c) the strengthening of the human and financial resources of the local Inspectorate, providing it with an annual operational budget (excluding staff and running costs), if possible equivalent to US$50,000;

d) the introduction of urgent preventive conservation measures for mosaics and other exposed structures, including more effective visitor control;

e) the adoption of a legal text on the "protection and presentation of archaeological sites and their buffer zones" and the elaboration of a plan that establishes the construction, architecture, urban-planning and land use regulations for the Tipasa site, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre;

f) the preparation, in the above framework, of a Management Plan for the property, also in consultation with the World Heritage Centre.

4. Requests the State Party to submit a report to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2005, on the progress achieved on the above recommendations for review by the Committee at its 29th session, in 2005;

5. Decides to retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

28 COM 15C.2
List of World Heritage in Danger

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Following examination of state of conservation reports of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-04/28.COM/15A Rev),

2. Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

  • Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.21)
  • Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley, Afghanistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.22)
  • Butrint, Albania (Decision 28 COM 15A.28)
  • Tipasa, Algeria (Decision 28 COM 15A.16)
  • Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower, Azerbaijan (Decision 28 COM 15A.29)
  • Royal Palaces of Abomey, Benin (Decision 28 COM 15A.14)
  • Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park, Central African Republic (Decision 28 COM 15A.1)
  • Comoé National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (Decision 28 COM 15A.2 )
  • Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve, Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea (Decision 28 COM 15A.5)
  • Okapi Wildlife Reserve, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Kahuzi-Biega National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Virunga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Garamba National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Salonga National Park, Democratic Rep. of the Congo (Decision 28 COM 15A.3)
  • Sangay National Park, Ecuador (Decision 28 COM 15A.12)
  • Abu Mena, Egypt (Decision 28 COM 15A.17)
  • Simien National Park, Ethiopia
  • (Decision 28 COM 15A.4)
  • Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras (Decision 28 COM 15A.13)
  • Group of Monuments at Hampi, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.24)
  • Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, India (Decision 28 COM 15A.10)
  • Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat), Iraq (Decision 28 COM 15A.18)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls, Jerusalem (Decision 28 COM 15A.31)
  • Timbuktu, Mali (Decision 28 COM 15A. 15)
  • Kathmandu Valley, Nepal (Decision 28 COM 15A.25)
  • Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves, Niger (Decision 28 COM 15A.6)
  • Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore, Pakistan (Decision 28 COM 15A.26)
  • Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone, Peru (Decision 28 COM 15A.30)
  • Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras, Philippines (Decision 28 COM 15A.27)
  • Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary, Senegal (Decision 28 COM 15A.7 )
  • Ichkeul National Park, Tunisia (Decision 28 COM 15A.9)
  • Everglades National Park, United States of America (Decision 28 COM 15A.11)
  • Historic Town of Zabid, Yemen (Decision 28 COM 15A.20)

Draft Decision: 28 COM15A.16

 The World Heritage Committee,

 1.   Strongly encourages the State Party to take the necessary measures for the urgent application of the recommendations included in the report of the mission of the Centre elaborated in September 2002;

 2.   Requests the State Party to submit a report to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2005, on the progress achieved on the above recommendations for review by the Committee at its 29th session, in 2005;

 3.   Decides to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Report year: 2004
Algeria
Date of Inscription: 1982
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)(iv)
Danger List (dates): 2002-2006
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 28COM (2004)
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