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

Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu

Peru
Factors affecting the property in 1997*
  • Fire (widlfires)
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Dam construction;
  • Power line development;
  • Wild fires;
  • Encroachment;
  • Urbanization of the valley
  • Helicopters flights
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1997
Requests approved: 10 (from 1986-1992)
Total amount approved : 161,625 USD
Missions to the property until 1997**

1997: joint ICOMOS/IUCN mission

Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 1997

The Committee at its twentieth session (Merida, 1996) requested the State Party a full report on the state of conservation and the management mechanisms of Machu Picchu by 15 April 1997. At the time of the preparation of this document, no report had been received.

Action Required

The Bureau, based on additional information that may be available at the time of the twenty-first session of the Bureau may recommend appropriate actions to the consideration of the State Party and the Committee.


21st extraordinary session of the Bureau in 1997:
The Bureau at its twenty-first session requested ICOMOS and IUCN to undertake a joint mission to Machu Picchu in order to examine the management and conservation of the site and to draw up recommendations for future actions. IUCN and ICOMOS presented the main conclusions of this report to the Bureau, particularly with regard to the following issues:
1) Management of the Sanctuary: Integrated management of the Sanctuary is considered essential and should involve the National Institute for Culture (INC), the National Institute for Natural Resources (INRENA) and the Government of the Inka region.
2) Master Plan: There is an urgent need for a comprehensive master plan for the Sanctuary. A technical workshop could be held in order to initiate the preparation of such a plan.
3) Planning of interventions: A monitoring and evaluation programme should be established for all new and ongoing interventions, particularly the helicopter flights from Cusco to Aguas Calientes, a proposed funicular or cable-car system to access the ruins of the Inka city, road constructions, among others.
4) Tourism: Tourism should be managed and carefully planned in the context of the master plan.
5) Human settlements: It was noted that action is being taken to resolve problems of squatters in the Sanctuary but concern was expressed that local government pressure for road access could bring considerable additional problems from an influx of squatters and hunters.

The Bureau recommended the Committee to adopt the following:

"The Committee, having examined the report of IUCN and ICOMOS, expresses its concern about the deficient management arrangements for the Sanctuary and urges the Peruvian authorities to establish an adequate management structure for the site. It furthermore recommends them to prepare a comprehensive master plan as an overall guiding instrument for conservation, planning, infrastructural interventions, tourism development, etc. 
The Committee requests the Peruvian authorities to examine the report with great attention and to transmit its views on, and follow-up actions foreseen in response to the conclusions and recommendations contained in it to the Secretariat by 15 April 1998 at the latest for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-second session."

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1997

ICOMOS and IUCN will report during the session on the results of their joint mission to Machu Picchu which was requested by the Bureau at its twenty-first session.

On 6 September 1997, a series of fires broke out within the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu and close to the Inca ruins and the village of Aguas Calientes. The fire was extinguished by heavy rain on 10 and 11 September. A detailed report on the damage to the archaeological site was received from the National Institute for Culture of Peru on 29 September. All information was transmitted to ICOMOS and IUCN for examination in the context of the mission.

Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 1997

The Bureau is requested to examine the ICOMOS/IUCN report and take the appropriate action thereupon.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1997
21 BUR IV.B.36
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

The Bureau thanked the Government of Peru for the report on Machu Picchu prepared by the National Institute for Culture. It expressed its concern, however, about the apparent lack of integral management mechanisms for the property and the implementation and/or consideration of several projects that might have a negative impact either on its natural or cultural values. The Bureau, therefore, requested IUCN and ICOMOS to undertake a joint mission to Machu Picchu in order to examine the management and conservation of the site and to draw up recommendations for future actions. The Bureau requested IUCN and ICOMOS to submit a report on the mission to the twenty-first session of the World Heritage Committee.

The Bureau suggested that the mission also examines the measures taken for the protection and conservation of the Chan Chan Archaeological Zone, on which the Committee at its twentieth session requested the Government of Peru to submit a full state of conservation report by 15 September 1997.

21 COM VII.C.42
SOC: Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

VII.42 Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

The Committee, having examined the report of IUCN and ICOMOS, expressed its concern about the deficient management arrangements for the Sanctuary and urged the Peruvian authorities to establish an adequate management structure for the site. It furthermore recommended them to prepare a comprehensive master plan as an overall guiding instrument for conservation, planning, infrastructural interventions, tourism development, etc.

The Committee requested the Peruvian authorities to examine the report with great attention and to transmit its views, and follow-up actions foreseen in response to the conclusions and recommendations contained therein, to the Secretariat by 15 April 1998 at the latest, for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-second session.

No draft Decision

Report year: 1997
Peru
Date of Inscription: 1983
Category: Mixed
Criteria: (i)(iii)(vii)(ix)
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