Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 1985
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger N/A
Previous Committee Decisions see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/300/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 0
For details, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/300/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Previous monitoring missions
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
Real estate project
Illustrative material see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/300/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1988
In the case of the city of Quebec, two real estate projects had given rise to concern in 1987 and the Canadian authorities had provided a report on the subject.
The representative of Canada stated that, although several projects were still under study, the cultural heritage of Old Quebec would be safeguarded and the Committee would be advised of any change in the property.
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM
Decision Adopted: 12 COM X.B.41-43
41. The Secretariat informed the Committee of problems that had arisen in the case of the three World Heritage sites. First, in the case of the city of Quebec, two real estate projects had given rise to concern in 1987 and the Canadian authorities had provided a report on the subject. The representative of Canada stated that, although several projects were still under study, the cultural heritage of Old Quebec would be safeguarded and the Committee would be advised of any change in the property.
42. As regards the site of Goreme in Turkey, the Secretariat informed the Committee of an ICOMOS report indicating two serious problems concerning the environment of this site. The Turkish authorities advised the Committee of the intent of their government to take all measures required for the protection of this vulnerable site.
43. The case of the Studenica Monastery was also submitted to the Committee. To evaluate the impact of the possible construction of a dam some ten kilometres from this property, Unesco had asked ICCROM, at the request of the Government of Yugoslavia, to investigate the situation. The Chairman invited the ICCROM representative, who had been part of the investigating team, to report on the matter. He stated that there did not seem to be technical grounds for preventing the dam project as presently contemplated. However, the ethical problem of protecting cultural and historical values linked to the Studenica valley, eponym of the monastery, was highly important and should be taken into account. He also advised the Committee as to the possibility of alternative although more costly dam locations much farther away from the monastery. The main purpose of constructing the dam was to ensure the water supply of a region where other rivers are already polluted. This raised the basic problem of protecting the environment, underlying other equally essential matters. Finally, the question was whether it was indeed necessary to sacrifice the admirable Studenica site since there were alternative in order to improve economic and social conditions in Serbia. The Committee took note of the report and requested the Secretariat to convey its concern to the Yugoslav authorities.