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

Kizhi Pogost

Russian Federation
Factors affecting the property in 1993*
  • Financial resources
  • Governance
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:

    Lack of fire /lightning protection; Deformation and deterioration of the structures

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Legal framework;
  • Governance;
  • Management systems/ management plan;
  • Financial resources;
  • Lack of fire /lightning protection;
  • Deformation and deterioration of the structures
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1993
Requests approved: 1 (from 1992-1992)
Total amount approved : 9,000 USD
1992 Mission of 3 experts to define the state of ... (Approved)   9,000 USD
Missions to the property until 1993**

Summer 1993: ICOMOS mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1993

[Oral report by ICOMOS and the Secretariat] 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1993
17 BUR VIII.2
Kizhi Pogost (Russia)

ICOMOS reported on its continuous involvement in the conservation efforts for this site. As a follow-up to the decision of the World Heritage Committee at its sixteenth session, to support the coordination effort undertaken by ICOMOS, a technical study programme has been set up for 1993, including a 5-6 week mission of 5 or 6 experts. These experts will be supported by their respective governments so tilt no professional fees will be paid from the Fund. The results of the mission will be presented by ICOMOS to the World Heritage Committee at its seventeenth session in December 1993.

The Bureau commended ICOMOS' approach in assistance to Kizhi Pogost, using its professional network and obtaining substantial contributions from the Governments of Canada, Norway and Finland.

17 COM X
SOC: Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)

Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)

At the seventeenth session of the Bureau, ICOMOS informed about its involvement in the conservation efforts for Kizhi Pogost and that an expert mission would be undertaken to the site. The Bureau approved a technical assistance request to support this mission with funds provided under the Canadian Green Plan. The mission took place in summer 1993 and a full report was available. In collaboration with the Russian counterparts, the mission addressed issues such as legal protection, conservation management, fire protection, iconostasis conservation, documentation, and monitoring, history and authenticity, biological/chemical deterioration, structure and conservation philosophy and goals.

Based on the findings of the mission, ICOMOS recommended that in 1994 high priority be given to finding means to support the following study and decision-making activities:

  • monitoring and documentation
  • completion of all required preliminary studies and reaching consensus on the conservation concept
  • completion of individual conservation studies and their consolidation within a comprehensive and integrated conservation plan.

A major conservation project at the site could then start in 1995.

The Committee commended ICOMOS for its excellent collaboration with the Russian authorities and experts and the collaboration provided by the Governments of Canada, Finland and Norway and the individual ICOMOS members who participated in the mission. The Committee endorsed the recommendations formulated by ICOMOS.

No draft Decision 

Report year: 1993
Russian Federation
Date of Inscription: 1990
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iv)(v)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 17COM (1993)
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