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


Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin

Factors affecting the property in 2000*
  • Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure
  • Housing
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Urban pressure
  • Current traffic planning 
  • Need to review the legal protection of the site
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2000
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 2000

Previous deliberations:
Twenty-second session of the Committee - paragraph VII.34
Twenty-third session of the Committee - paragraph X.37

New information: The Committee at its twenty-third session acknowledged the efforts made to restrict as much as possible the negative effects of the Havel Project (German Unity Project 17) on the integrity of the World Heritage site. It requested the German authorities to continue its efforts to find a solution in conformity with the requirements of the World Heritage Convention. A report should be provided before 15 April 2000 in order that it may be examined by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session.

To date, the requested report has not been submitted to the Secretariat. By letter dated 19 April 2000, the State Party asked the Secretariat to extend the deadline of submission of the requested report. In the event that the report is not submitted to the forthcoming session of the Bureau, it requested to postpone the discussion until the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau.

Action Required

The Bureau may wish to examine the information that may be available at the time of its session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2000

The requested report was received from the German authorities and transmitted to ICOMOS for examination.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2000
24 BUR IV.B.63
Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany)

The Bureau noted the request from the German authorities that the deadline for the submission of a state of conservation report be extended and requested the authorities to submit such report by 15 September 2000 for examination by ICOMOS and by the Committee at its twenty-fourth session.

24 COM VIII.iii.35-43
State of conservation reports of cultural properties which the Committee noted

VIII.35 Brasilia (Brazil)

Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China)

The Potala Palace, Lhasa (China)

VIII.36 Islamic Cairo (Egypt)

VIII.37 Roman Monuments, Cathedral St Peter and Liebfrauen-Church in Trier (Germany)

Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany)

Classical Weimar (Germany)

Hortabagy National Park (Hungary)

VIII.38 Khajuraho Group of Monuments (India)

Sun Temple of Konarak (India)

Petra (Jordan)

Luang Prabang (Lao People's Democratic Republic)

Byblos (Lebanon)

Ksar Ait Ben Haddou (Morocco)

VIII.39 Island of Mozambique (Mozambique)

Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)

Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo - San Lorenzo (Panama)

Archaeological Site of Chavin (Peru)

VIII.40 Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Philippines)

VIII.41 Baroque Churches of the Philippines (Philippines)

VIII.42 Cultural Landscape of Sintra (Portugal)

VIII.43 Istanbul (Turkey)

Complex of Hué Monuments (Vietnam)

The Bureau may wish to examine the information that may be available at the time of its session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.

Report year: 2000
Date of Inscription: 1990
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(ii)(iv)

* : 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.