Central Highlands of Sri Lanka

As of 5 May 2011, the State Party did not submit a report on the state of conservation of the property which was requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010), and thus limited information is available regarding the implementation of the World Heritage Committee’s recommendations.

a) Management framework

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recall that the World Heritage Committee, at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010), requested the State Party to establish an overall management framework for the serial property, as well as completed and effective management plans for each of the component parts of the property and a fully effective management and monitoring framework for tourism, within twelve months of the property’s inscription on the List of World Heritage. They also recall that the State Party had included an explanatory note in the nomination which stated that a revised management system would be developed and implemented within two years of the property’s inscription. They consider that the World Heritage Committee request has not been complied with, and that, without a progress report from the State Party, it is impossible to assess whether the proposed time frame of two years for the development and implementation of a revised management system is realistic. They also consider that an overall management system for the serial property should be developed and implemented as a priority, in order to meet the requirements set out in the Operational Guidelines, as well as completed and effective management plans for each of the component parts of the property.

b) Boundaries and buffer zones

At its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010), the World Heritage Committee requested the State Party to establish, within 12 months of the property’s inscription and in consultation with local stakeholders, effectively functioning buffer zones for the property in order to ensure its protection from threats arising from outside its boundaries. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recall that, in its evaluation of the property, IUCN had identified the need to better delineate the entire boundary of all three components in the field. They note that there are no indications of progress in the implementation of the World Heritage Committee’s request, nor in the delineation of boundaries in the field.

c) Other conservation issues – threats identified at the time of the property’s inscription

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recall that a number of existing and potential threats identified during IUCN’s evaluation of the property (including illicit gem mining, invasive species, forest die-back, tourism pressure and cardamom cultivation) were being addressed by the State Party. The World Heritage Centre received additional reports of such activities taking place, particularly in the Knuckles Conservation Forest. A letter was sent to the State Party on 17 December 2010, requesting information on these reports, but no response was received. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN consider that, without a progress report from the State Party, and in the absence of any response to letters to the State Party, it is impossible to assess the current status of these threats. 

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recommend that the World Heritage Committee express its regret that no evidence of progress has been demonstrated in the implementation of its recommendations, adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010), including the principal requirement to submit a report to the Committee. They consider that an overall management system for the serial property should be developed and implemented as a priority, in order to meet the requirements set out in the Operational Guidelines, as well as completed and effective management plans for each of the component parts of the property. They note that the delineation of the entire boundary of all three components in the field needs to be improved and effectively functioning buffer zones established. 

IUCN notes that the Advisory Bodies had recommended referral of the property to allow these aspects to be addressed prior to inscription, and the World Heritage Committee took the decision to inscribe the property following the clear reassurance from the State Party to the World Heritage Committee that these matters would be addressed. IUCN also notes that this is a clear illustration of the importance of the referral option within the World Heritage Committee’s decision taking options, and the workload and credibility issues that may result when properties that do not fully meet the requirements of the Operational Guidelines are inscribed.