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

Coro and its Port

Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
Factors affecting the property in 2016*
  • Flooding
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Water (rain/water table)
  • Other Threats:

    Serious deterioration of materials and structure; Deterioration of the architectural and urban coherence and integrity of the property

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Serious deterioration of materials and structures
  • Deterioration of the architectural and urban coherence and integrity of the property
  • Lack of adequate management, planning and conservation mechanisms
  • Absence of detailed and technical information on the state of conservation of the property since 2007
  • Flooding and water damage
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Considerable decay of materials and structures resulting from lack of comprehensive conservation and maintenance, and torrential rains in 2004, 2005 and 2010;
  • Deterioration of architectural and urban coherence compromising the integrity and authenticity of the property;
  • Lack of adequate and efficient management, planning and conservation mechanisms, and institutional arrangements. 
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger

Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5965 

Corrective Measures for the property

Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5965

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures
Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5965;
Updated in 2015: see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6263
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2016

Total amount provided: USD 20,000 (Spanish Funds-in-Trust for World Heritage) for the planning, implementation and subsequent publications of participatory workshops and meetings with artisans and civil society in Coro and La Vela. 

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2016
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2016**

September 2006: World Heritage Centre mission to assessment of the state of conservation; April 2005, May 2008 and February 2011: Joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring missions.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2016

On 10 February 2016, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/658/documents/ and responds to each of the matters raised by the Committee in Decision 39 COM 7A.48, as well as to the set of revised corrective measures approved in Decision 38 COM 7A.23.

The report includes the information requested on the clarification of boundaries for both components of the property submitted within the framework of the Retrospective inventory exercise. It also includes a detailed map with a preliminary proposal for the extension of the buffer zone for the component of Coro.

It further provides detailed information on the methodology applied in planning and conservation of monumental structures, detailed documentation on the state of conservation of each of the individual buildings, as well as on the completion and planning of conservation and restoration intervention.  

The Technical Team of the Office of Strategic Projects and Design for Heritage Areas of Coro and its Port of La Vela and its Protection Areas (OPEDAP) has designed, implemented and evaluated all work in the heritage areas through inspection, advice, support, supervision and monitoring of works, with effective support exercised by Community Councils.  

Effective cooperation has been established between the National Institute for Cultural Heritage (IPC), the Management Authority (OPEDAP) and other Ministries, State authorities and institutions, and social councils that intervene in and support the preservation of the World Heritage property and its buffer zone.

The State Party further reports on the strategy for the transmission of traditional know-how and the great number of training and workshop activities that have been implemented. Two social enterprises have been established that incorporate artisans, trainees and the IPC.

New ordinances have been issued by the Municipalities that have responsibility for the two components of the property that regulate the use, functions and conservation techniques of buildings. These will also be instrumental in addressing the matter of abandoned properties.

As for the drainage system, a Master Plan has been completed and a diagnosis of the present situation has been commissioned.

The State Party furthermore provides a number of elements that are under preparation and that will be included in the future Management Plan. This includes the management structure, inter-institutional arrangements, legal provisions, risk preparedness, social participation, public use and traffic management, among others.

Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2016

Upon the request of the State Party, an ICOMOS Advisory mission took place in October 2015 to assess the state of conservation of the property, with particular attention to concrete progress and actions to implement the revised corrective measures adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session (Doha, 2014). The mission report (available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/658/documents) gives valuable insight into the actual situation in the property and concludes that the State Party has made remarkable progress as to complying with the 11 corrective measures, but has not yet achieved all of the results specified in the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR).  It also concludes that the main threats to the property are still the lack of a suitable drainage system and of a Management Plan including a Disasters Risk Plan. The mission report also provided recommendations to the State Party on how to prepare its report to the Committee.

The substantive report of the State Party is welcomed. It demonstrates in clear terms its commitment at all levels of government, as well as the progress made in the implementation of the corrective measures. On the basis of the ICOMOS Advisory mission report, very important progress can be reported in the following areas:

  • Spatial analysis, inventory and assessment of the state of conservation of all structures in the World Heritage areas of Coro and La Vela;
  • The clarifications on the property boundaries submitted are satisfactory and will be presented to the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session for approval (see Document WHC/16/40.COM/8D);
  • The preliminary proposal for the extension of the buffer zone of the component Coro to be submitted officially as a Minor Boundary Modification;
  • The conservation plan and analysis are based on detailed inventories and implemented with significant government funding. Involvement and participation of private owners is explicitly sought and promoted;
  • Traditional know-how is transmitted through extensive training programmes and workshops as well as the creation of two social enterprises of which the artisans have ownership and that ensure long-term transmission of knowledge;
  • Legal and regulatory instruments at different levels provide a coherent framework and an analysis could be undertaken to establish if additional instruments are necessary. The conservation strategy is articulated with the regional planning instruments;
  • The management structure is clearly articulated among local, state and national government levels and ensures social participation;
  • Traffic management includes the closure of streets for vehicular traffic, both in Coro and La Vela;
  • Funding for the management and conservation is mainly allocated from the central government through the State of Falcon.

It can be concluded that the elaboration of an effective drainage system as well as of the Management Plan are the main outstanding corrective measures that the State Party should be urged to implement as soon as possible. Considering the many elements that are already available, this should be feasible within a one to two-year period. Once the Management Plan and drainage system are completed and found appropriate, the World Heritage Committee would then be in the position to assess if the DSOCR for this property has been reached, and if its removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger can be considered.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2016
40 COM 7A.5
Coro and its Port (Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of) (C 658)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/16/40.COM/7A,
  2. Recalling Decision 39 COM 7A.48, adopted at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015),
  3. Appreciates the initiative of the State Party to invite an ICOMOS Advisory mission, welcomes the progress reported in the implementation of the corrective measures adopted in Decision 38 COM 7A.23 and expresses its appreciation for the steady progress in the conservation and restoration of both public and private property, as well as the extensive programme for the promotion and transmission of traditional know-how;
  4. Also appreciates the efforts made by the State Party in the completion of the boundary clarification requested in the framework of the Retrospective Inventory process;
  5. Takes note of the preliminary proposal submitted for the extension of the buffer zone of the component Coro and requests the State Party to formally submit this proposal, as a Minor Boundary Modification, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines;
  6. Considers that the two main outstanding matters that should be addressed to complete the set of corrective measures are the preparation of the Management Plan and the implementation of effective drainage systems, and also requests the State Party to continue the implementation of all corrective measures and, in particular, to take the necessary measures to prepare the Management Plan and effective drainage systems;
  7. Also considers that once these corrective measures are effectively implemented, an assessment could then be made to check whether the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) is achieved;
  8. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2017, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 41st session in 2017;
  9. Decides to retain Coro and its Port (Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
40 COM 8C.2
Update of the list of World Heritage in Danger (retained sites)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC/16/40.COM/7A, WHC/16/40.COM/7A.Add and WHC/16/40.COM/7A.Add.2),
  2. Decides to retain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
  • Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Decision 40 COM 7A.26)
  • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 40 COM 7A.27)
  • Belize, Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Decision 40 COM 7A.32)
  • Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosí (Decision 40 COM 7A.1)
  • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.34)
  • Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 40 COM 7A.2)
  • Côte d'Ivoire, Comoé National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.35)
  • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 40 COM 7A.36)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.37)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.38)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 40 COM 7A.39)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.40)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.41)
  • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 40 COM 7A.9)
  • Ethiopia, Simien National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.43)
  • Georgia, Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery (Decision 40 COM 7A.28)
  • Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 40 COM 7A.33)
  • Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 40 COM 7A.48)
  • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 40 COM 7A.10)
  • Iraq, Hatra (Decision 40 COM 7A.11)
  • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 40 COM 7A.12)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 40 COM 7A.13)
  • Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 40 COM 7A.44)
  • Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 40 COM 7A.6)
  • Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 40 COM 7A.7)
  • Niger, Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 40 COM 7A.45)
  • Palestine, Birthplace of Jesus: Church of the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Route, Bethlehem (Decision 40 COM 7A.14)
  • Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 40 COM 7A.15)
  • Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 40 COM 7A.3)
  • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 40 COM 7A.4)
  • Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.46)
  • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 40 COM 7A. 30)
  • Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 40 COM 7A.49)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 40 COM 7A.16)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 40 COM 7A.17)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 40 COM 7A.18)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 40 COM 7A.19)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 40 COM 7A.20)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 40 COM 7A.21)
  • Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 40 COM 7A.8)
  • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (Decision 40 COM 7A.31)
  • United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 40 COM 7A.47)
  • United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 40 COM 7A.50)
  • Venezuela, Coro and its Port (Decision 40 COM 7A.5)
  • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 40 COM 7A.23)
  • Yemen, Old City of Sana’a (Decision 40 COM 7A.24)
  • Yemen, Old Walled City of Shibam (Decision 40 COM 7A.25).
40 COM 8D
Clarifications of property boundaries and areas by States Parties

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/16/40.COM/8D,
  2. Recalling Decision 39 COM 8D, adopted at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015),
  3. Acknowledges the excellent work accomplished by States Parties in the clarification of the boundaries of their World Heritage properties and commends them for their efforts to improve the credibility of the World Heritage List;
  4. Recalls that the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies are not able to examine proposals for minor or significant modifications to boundaries of World Heritage properties whenever the delimitations of such properties as inscribed remain unclear;
  5. Takes note of the clarifications of property boundaries and areas provided by the States Parties as presented in the Annex of Document WHC/16/40.COM/8D:

    ARAB STATES

    • Syrian Arab Republic: Site of Palmyra;

    EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA

    • Canada: Dinosaur Provincial Park;
    • Croatia: Plitvice Lakes National Park;
    • Czech Republic: Holy Trinity Column in Olomouc; Litomyšl Castle;
    • France: Routes of Santiago de Compostela in France; Place Stanislas, Place de la Carrière and Place d'Alliance in Nancy;
    • Germany: Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar and Dessau; Luther Memorials in Eisleben and Wittenberg;
    • Holy See: Vatican City;
    • Italy: City of Verona;
    • Russian Federation: Kremlin and Red Square, Moscow;
    • Spain: Cave of Altamira and Paleolithic Cave Art of Northern Spain; Las Médulas; La Lonja de la Seda de Valencia; San Millán Yuso and Suso Monasteries;
    • Sweden: Skogskyrkogården;
    • United States of America: La Fortaleza and San Juan National Historic Site in Puerto Rico; Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site; Chaco Culture;

    LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

    • Belize: Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System;
    • Cuba: Old Havana and its Fortification System;
    • Mexico: Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan;
    • Peru: Huascarán National Park;
    • Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of): Coro and its Port;

  6. Requests the States Parties which have not yet answered the questions raised in the framework of the Retrospective Inventory to provide all clarifications and documentation as soon as possible, and by 1 December 2016 at the latest, for their subsequent examination, if the technical requirements are met, by the 41st session of the World Heritage Committee in 2017.
Draft Decision: 40 COM 7A.5

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/16/40.COM/7A,
  2. Recalling Decision 39 COM 7A.48, adopted at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015),
  3. Appreciates the initiative of the State Party to invite an ICOMOS Advisory mission, welcomes the progress reported in the implementation of the corrective measures adopted in Decision 38 COM 7A.23 and expresses its appreciation for the steady progress in the conservation and restoration of both public and private property, as well as the extensive programme for the promotion and transmission of traditional know-how;
  4. Also appreciates the efforts made by the State Party in the completion of the boundary clarification requested in the framework of the Retrospective Inventory process;
  5. Takes note of the preliminary proposal submitted for the extension of the buffer zone of the component Coro and requests the State Party to formally submit this proposal, as a Minor Boundary Modification, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines;
  6. Considers that the two main outstanding matters that should be addressed to complete the set of corrective measures are the preparation of the Management Plan and the implementation of effective drainage systems, and also requests the State Party to continue the implementation of all corrective measures and, in particular, to take the necessary measures to prepare the Management Plan and effective drainage systems;
  7. Also considers that once these corrective measures are effectively implemented, an assessment could then be made to check whether the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) is achieved;
  8. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2017, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 41st session in 2017;
  9. Decides to retain Coro and its Port (Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Report year: 2016
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
Date of Inscription: 1993
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iv)(v)
Danger List (dates): 2005-present
Documents examined by the Committee
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2015) .pdf
arrow_circle_right 40COM (2016)
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