Sangiran Early Man Site

• Establishment of a new Management Board;
• Finalisation of appropriate land-use regulations facing of development pressure;
• Involvement of the residents as stakeholders in property management;
• Control over sand mining.

On 10 February 2014 the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/593/documents:

a) Legal protection, development control and management

The report states that protection of the property has been improved by:

• National law (No 26/2007) and Government Regulation (26/2008) on spatial planning, whereby all World Heritage sites are protected as National Strategic Areas.
• The Sragen Regulation (11/2011), which now requires Environmental Impact Assessments to be produced prior to development within the Sragen Regency.
• The establishment of the property as a National Vital Object in 2008.

The Conservation Office of Sangiran Early Man Site (BPSMP), established in 2007, is now appropriately funded within the Ministry of Education and Culture and manages the site effectively.

The new National Law on Cultural Heritage (11/2010) establishes Integrated Management Bureaus to facilitate coordinated management. The need for improvement is recognised, especially with regards to conservation and tourist issues, and establishment of a Bureau for Sangiran is in preparation.

b) Involving residents as stakeholders

The report acknowledges that this requires strengthening and new programmes include local community involvement in conservation, education programmes for training local craftsmen, compensation schemes for discovery of fossils and provision of local employment. However, there is no mention of involving communities in decision-making, the land purchase scheme, or assistance to local farmers, all of which was recommended in the 2008 mission report.

c) Illegal sand mining

This problem is now much reduced. New technical guidance (2013) was implemented by the Conservation Office which undertakes awareness-raising programmes for the community, monitoring of the property twice monthly, and coordination with local government to deal with breaches by legal means. However, the identification of alternative sites for mining outside the property is not mentioned, though the establishment of a new industrial area outside the property was described in the 2009 report.

d) Recent developments within the property/Site interpretation

The only recent developments, museum buildings, were all preceded by archaeological evaluation monitored by BPSMP archaeologists. No plans of these buildings are given. The 2008 mission report‘s concerns about the inadequate site interpretation may be rectified by these new museums.

e) Cartography

A letter accompanying the report refers to a new property map thus responding to the issue of inadequate cartography, which was one of the points raised in the 2008 mission report.

The State Party has made achievements in strengthening control over development and legislation to alleviate the problem of uncoordinated decision-making in development, tourist and conservation issues. However, the proposed Sragen Bureau, in its early stages of development, should be established soon at an appropriate level to ensure integrated decision-making and adherence to these decisions. Conservation and Tourism Plans, recommended in the 2008 mission report, should be produced or endorsed by the Sragen Bureau to direct coordinated actions in these areas.

The State Party undertook a number of efforts to address spatial planning, now subject to environmental impact assessment regulation in both the Sragen and Karanganyar Regencies. However, no specific reference to the regulation at Karanganyar is given.

With regards to community involvement in the conservation and management of the property, strategies for increasing economic benefit through artistic production, employment and education are still at an early stage of planning, and should be implemented as soon as possible. The State Party should improve the involvement of communities in decision-making, as recommended in the 2008 mission report.

However, the measures taken for restricting illegal sand mining and fossil trafficking and the continuing monitoring of the property by properly qualified staff should be welcomed, though the longer term identification of alternative sources of sand seems not to have been addressed.

The development of museum buildings within the property to enhance interpretation, however, gives rise to some concerns over appropriateness of building design. The integrated management system overseen by the new Bureau should enhance consensual decision-making and the regulations requiring environmental or heritage impact assessments should aid decision-making on building design. It is assumed that the new museums will enhance dramatically the interpretation of the site.