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

Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection

Panama
Factors affecting the property in 2014*
  • Fishing/collecting aquatic resources
  • Human resources
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Marine transport infrastructure
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Continued and growing presence of cattle;
  • Delayed implementation of the Management Plan for the Special Zone of Marine Protection;
  • Planned construction of a naval base;
  • Absence of clear regulations relating to the property;
  • Commercial and sport fishing;
  • Insufficient management capacity at the property.
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2014

Total amount granted: USD350,000 for management planning, installation of mooring buoys for diving boats, working with local communities, capacity building, public use planning and improved stakeholder understanding of legal protection measures.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2014
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2014

An IUCN reactive monitoring mission visited the property in January 2014. Subsequently, on 31 January 2014, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report and a summary for public access. Both the mission report and the summary are available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1138/documents/. The State Party reports on a number of conservation issues raised by the Committee at its previous sessions, as follows:

  • Panama’s National Environmental Authority (ANAM) will work closely with the Coiba National Park Executive Council to complete the Management Plan for the Special Zone of Marine Protection by the end of June 2014. As for the management plan of Coiba National Park, the State Party states its commitment to extend its validity by five years beyond its current expiry in June 2014.- The State Party notes its intention to request international assistance to conduct a Strategic Evaluation of the implementation of the Management Plan using the World Heritage Centre tools;
  • The Retrospective Statement of the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property was submitted to the World Heritage Centre following recommendations by IUCN in December 2013;
  • There is currently no specific State Policy for the development and conservation of the coastal zone opposite the property, and no information is provided regarding the development of such a policy on the basis of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the coastal zone’s development potential, as requested by the Committee in Decision 33 COM 7B.38;
  • The National Wildlife Fund of ANAM has allocated USD 975,000 for the removal of the livestock in situ and is in the process of selecting the contracting firm to undertake the work. It is expected that all livestock will be removed by the end of 2014;
  • The State Party notes its intention to design and implement specific biosecurity measures to avoid that the naval base becomes a source of introduction of alien species by air and water, and to work on a capacity building plan for the naval station staff, in order to avoid staff engaging in wildlife traffic and agriculture. It foresees that this training will be fully integrated in the navy’s official curriculum by 1 January 2015.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2014

Progress has been made by the State Party with the removal of livestock from the property including a commitment to complete all removal by end 2014. The mission concluded that the naval base on Coiba Island does not seem to pose a major threat to the OUV of the property and the State Party’s progress toward implementation of biosecurity measures and naval staff training is positive.

The mission concluded that fisheries, and in particular illegal and sport fisheries, but also industrial fishing, pose a threat to the OUV of the property. The lack of clear information on the scope of extraction and the lack of effective fisheries management and enforcement of regulations is a serious problem. Sport fisheries are of particular concern as they seem to increase rapidly and are targeting zones where spawning/nursing areas, rare corals and high endemism can be found. The implementation of adequate fisheries regulation in the Special Zone of Marine Protection (SZMP) is a key priority and effective management of those areas most under threat and most critical to the OUV of the property needs to be established with immediate effect. The mission also concluded that an increase in tourism visitation, if not well managed, will pose a threat to the long-term conservation of the property’s OUV. The new legislation that is currently under development would permit private development on small islands in the northern part of the property, which is prohibited under the current regulations of the management plan. The proposed new legislation is clearly inconsistent with the property’s OUV.  The Coiba Fund needs to become operational as soon as possible and foresee in the establishment and maintenance of an adequate surveillance and patrolling system that is conducted by professionally skilled staff and ensures regulations for fisheries and tourism throughout the property are enforced. The Executive Council’s decision-making power requires strengthening and should include representatives from the tourism sector and the local communities from the coastal areas opposite the property, in particular those of Zoná and Mariato municipalities, among others.

The Committee may wish to welcome the State Party’s progress with the removal of livestock and its commitment to extend the management plan for the national park, but request the State Party to complete and implement fisheries regulations for the SZMP as a matter of priority, which should include no-take zones and seasonal closures for critical areas (in particular Hannibal Bank, Montuosa Island and Uva Island), establish limits on the amount and capacity of fishing vessels in the property, and set quotas for the total allowable catches and minimum sizes for key species. The Committee may also recommend that the Coiba Fund becomes fully operational as soon as possible and supports the effective management of the property, in particular its fisheries. The Committee may urge the State Party to rigorously ensure that no development will be permitted within the boundaries of the property and reiterate its request to the State Party to ensure that cumulative and combined impacts on the property’s OUV caused by mainland developments are effectively addressed.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2014
38 COM 7B.84
Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection (Panama) (N 1138rev)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B,
  2. Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.31, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),
  3. Welcomes the State Party’s progress with the removal of the livestock from the property and encourages the State Party to fully implement its commitment to have all livestock removed from the property by end 2014;
  4. Also welcomes the State Party’s progress with the development and implementation of biosafety measures and naval staff training and encourages the State Party to remain vigilant in ensuring that the naval base does not become a threat to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property;
  5. Notes the conclusion of the joint 2014 World Heritage Centre/IUCN reactive monitoring mission that the property remains under pressure, and requests the State Party to implement all its recommendations;
  6. Expresses its concern about the negative impact of fisheries, and in particular illegal and sport fisheries, on the OUV of the property, and urges the State Party to complete and implement the management plan for the Special Zone of Marine Protection (SZMP) as a matter of priority, which should include clear regulations related to fisheries management, including no-take zones and seasonal closures of critical areas, such as Hannibal Bank, Montuosa Island and Uva Island, and also requests the State Party to provide an electronic copy and three printed copies of the draft management plan for the SZMP as soon as it is available, for review by the World Heritage Centre and IUCN;
  7. Further requests the State Party to rigorously ensure that no development will be permitted within the boundaries of the property, and that cumulative and combined impacts on the property’s OUV caused by mainland developments are effectively addressed;
  8. Also urges the State Party to ensure the Coiba Fund becomes fully operational at the earliest time possible and the decision-making power of the Executive Council is strengthened, by including representatives from the tourism sector and the local communities from the coastal areas opposite the property;
  9. Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2015 an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the progress made with the implementation of the recommendation of the reactive monitoring mission, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016
38 COM 8E
Adoption of Retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/8E,
  2. Congratulates the States Parties for the excellent work accomplished in the elaboration of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in their territories;
  3. Adopts the retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-14/38.COM/8E, for the following World Heritage properties:
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC:
  • China: Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area;
  • Japan: Gusuku Sites and Related Properties of the Kingdom of Ryukyu; Historic Monuments of Ancient Nara; Historic Villages of Shirakawa-go and Gokayama; The Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome);
  • Sri Lanka: Sinharaja Forest;
  • Vietnam: Hoi An Ancient Town; Complex of Hué Monuments;

    EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA:

    • Albania: Butrint;
    • Armenia: Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley;
    • Austria: Semmering Railway; Wachau Cultural Landscape;
    • Azerbaijan: Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower;
    • Belarus / Estonia / Finland / Latvia / Lithuania / Moldova / Norway / Russian Federation / Sweden / Ukraine: Struve Geodetic Arc;
    • Belgium: Major Town Houses of the Architect Victor Horta (Brussels); Neolithic Flint Mines at Spiennes (Mons); Notre-Dame Cathedral in Tournai; Plantin-Moretus House-Workshops-Museum Complex;
    • Bosnia and Herzegovina: Old Bridge Area of the Old City of Mostar;
    • Cyprus: Paphos;
    • Denmark: Ilulissat Icefjord;
    • Finland: Bronze Age Burial Site of Sammallahdenmäki; Fortress of Suomenlinna; Old Rauma; Petäjävesi Old Church; Verla Groundwood and Board Mill;
    • Georgia: Historical Monuments of Mtskheta; Upper Svaneti;
    • Germany / Poland: Muskauer Park / Park Mużakowski;
    • Germany: Abbey and Altenmünster of Lorsch; Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar and Dessau; Castles of Augustusburg and Falkenlust at Brühl; Collegiate Church, Castle and Old Town of Quedlinburg; Garden Kingdom of Dessau-Wörlitz; Luther Memorials in Eisleben and Wittenberg; Monastic Island of Reichenau; Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin; Pilgrimage Church of Wies; St Mary's Cathedral and St Michael's Church at Hildesheim; Völklingen Ironworks; Wartburg Castle; Würzburg Residence with the Court Gardens and Residence Square; Zollverein Coal Mine Industrial Complex in Essen;
    • Holy See / Italy: Historic Centre of Rome, the Properties of the Holy See in that City Enjoying Extraterritorial Rights and San Paolo Fuori le Mura;
    • Holy See: Vatican City;
    • Iceland: Þingvellir National Park;
    • Italy: Botanical Garden (Orto Botanico), Padua; Ferrara, City of the Renaissance, and its Po Delta; Historic Centre of Florence; Historic Centre of Naples;
    • Lithuania / Russian Federation: Curonian Spit;
    • Lithuania: Kernavė Archaeological Site (Cultural Reserve of Kernavė);
    • Malta: City of Valletta; Hal Saflieni Hypogeum; Megalithic Temples of Malta;
    • Mongolia / Russian Federation: Uvs Nuur Basin;
    • Montenegro: Natural and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor;
    • Netherlands: Historic Area of Willemstad, Inner City and Harbour, Curaçao;
    • Norway: Vegaøyan -- The Vega Archipelago; West Norwegian Fjords – Geirangerfjord and Nærøyfjord;
    • Poland: Centennial Hall in Wrocław; Historic Centre of Warsaw;
    • Portugal: Historic Centre of Évora; Landscape of the Pico Island Vineyard Culture; Monastery of Alcobaça; Monastery of the Hieronymites and Tower of Belém in Lisbon;
    • Russian Federation: Church of the Ascension, Kolomenskoye; Historical Centre of the City of Yaroslavl; Kizhi Pogost;
    • Slovakia: Bardejov Town Conservation Reserve; Vlkolínec;
    • Slovenia: Škocjan Caves;
    • Spain: Archaeological Ensemble of Mérida; Burgos Cathedral; Historic Centre of Cordoba; Monastery and Site of the Escurial, Madrid; Monuments of Oviedo and the Kingdom of the Asturias; Mudejar Architecture of Aragon; Old City of Salamanca; Old Town of Ávila with its Extra-Muros Churches; Old Town of Cáceres; Old Town of Segovia and its Aqueduct; Poblet Monastery; Route of Santiago de Compostela; Royal Monastery of Santa María de Guadalupe; San Cristóbal de La Laguna; Santiago de Compostela (Old Town); Works of Antoni Gaudí;
    • Turkey: Archaeological Site of Troy; City of Safranbolu; Hattusha: the Hittite Capital; Xanthos-Letoon;
    • Ukraine: Kiev: Saint-Sophia Cathedral and Related Monastic Buildings, Kiev-Pechersk Lavra;
    • United Kingdom: Gough and Inaccessible Islands; Henderson Island; Historic Town of St George and Related Fortifications, Bermuda;
    • United States of America: Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site; Chaco Culture; Independence Hall; Mesa Verde National Park; Monticello and the University of Virginia in Charlottesville; Statue of Liberty;

    LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARRIBBEANS:

    • Argentina: Ischigualasto / Talampaya Natural Parks; Los Glaciares; Península Valdés;
    • Belize: Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System;
    • Bolivia: City of Potosí;
    • Brazil: Brasilia; Historic Centre of Salvador de Bahia; Historic Centre of São Luís; Historic Centre of the Town of Diamantina; Historic Centre of the Town of Goiás; Historic Centre of the Town of Olinda; Historic Town of Ouro Preto; Sanctuary of Bom Jesus do Congonhas;
    • Colombia: Los Katíos National Park;
    • Costa Rica / Panama: Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park;
    • Cuba: Archaeological Landscape of the First Coffee Plantations in the South-East of Cuba; San Pedro de la Roca Castle, Santiago de Cuba; Urban Historic Centre of Cienfuegos; Viñales Valley;
    • Dominican Republic: Colonial City of Santo Domingo;
    • Guatemala: Tikal National Park;
    • Panama: Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection; Fortifications on the Caribbean Side, Portobelo and San Lorenzo;
    • Suriname: Central Suriname Nature Reserve; Historic Inner City of Paramaribo;

    4.  Decides that retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in Danger will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies in priority;
    5.  Further decides that, considering the high number of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value to be examined, the order in which they will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies will follow the Second Cycle of Periodic Reporting, namely:

    • World Heritage properties in the Arab States;
    • World Heritage properties in Africa;
    • World Heritage properties in Asia and the Pacific;
    • World Heritage properties in Latin America and the Caribbean;
    • World Heritage properties in Europe and North America;

    6.  Takes note that the World Heritage Centre is in the process of harmonising all sub-headings in the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value and, as appropriate, reflects name changes of World Heritage properties throughout the text of the Statements as requested by the Committee at its 37th session, and requests the World Heritage Centre to also update the size of the property and/or its buffer zone, as appropriate, following subsequent Decisions of the World Heritage Committee concerning Minor Boundary Modifications.
    7.  Requests the States Parties to provide support to the World Heritage Centre for translation of the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value into English or French respectively, and finally requests the Centre to upload the two language versions on its website.

    Draft Decision:   38 COM 7B.84

    The World Heritage Committee,

    1.  Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B,

    2.  Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.31, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),

    3.  Welcomes the State Party’s progress with the removal of the livestock from the property and encourages the State Party to fully implement its commitment to have all livestock removed from the property by end 2014;

    4.  Also welcomes the State Party’s progress with the development and implementation of biosafety measures and naval staff training and encourages the State Party to remain vigilant in ensuring that the naval base does not become a threat to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property;

    5.  Notes the conclusion of the joint 2014 World Heritage Centre/IUCN reactive monitoring mission that the property remains under pressure, and requests the State Party to implement all its recommendations;

    6.  Expresses its concern about the negative impact of fisheries, and in particular illegal and sport fisheries, on the OUV of the property, and urges the State Party to complete and implement the management plan for the Special Zone of Marine Protection (SZMP) as a matter of priority, which should include clear regulations related to fisheries management, including no-take zones and seasonal closures of critical areas, such as Hannibal Bank, Montuosa Island and Uva Island, and also requests the State Party to provide an electronic copy and three printed copies of the draft management plan for the SZMP as soon as it is available, for review by the World Heritage Centre and IUCN;

    7.  Further requests the State Party to rigorously ensure that no development will be permitted within the boundaries of the property, and that cumulative and combined impacts on the property’s OUV caused by mainland developments are effectively addressed;

    8.  Also urges the State Party to ensure the Coiba Fund becomes fully operational at the earliest time possible and the decision-making power of the Executive Council is strengthened, by including representatives from the tourism sector and the local communities from the coastal areas opposite the property;

    9.  Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2016 an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the progress made with the implementation of the recommendation of the reactive monitoring mission, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016

    Report year: 2014
    Panama
    Date of Inscription: 2005
    Category: Natural
    Criteria: (ix)(x)
    Documents examined by the Committee
    SOC Report by the State Party
    Report (2014) .pdf
    arrow_circle_right 38COM (2014)
    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