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

Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve

Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea
Factors affecting the property in 2017*
  • Financial resources
  • Human resources
  • Identity, social cohesion, changes in local population and community
  • Illegal activities
  • Land conversion
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Mining
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Mining
  • Influx of refugees
  • Agricultural encroachment
  • Deforestation
  • Poaching
  • Weak management capacity
  • Lack of resources
  • Lack of trans-boundary cooperation
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Iron-ore mining concession inside the property in Guinea
  • Arrival of large numbers of refugees from Liberia to areas in and around the Reserve
  • Insufficient institutional structure 
Corrective Measures for the property

Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4982

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures

In progress

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2017

Total amount granted:  USD 25,282 from the Rapid Response Facility in January 2012 (see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/news/830/)

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2017
Requests approved: 21 (from 1981-2015)
Total amount approved : 512,588 USD
2015 Appui à la capitalisation des acquis du programme de ... (Approved)   27,000 USD
2014 Protection de la biodiversité de la Réserve naturelle ... (Approved)   20,366 USD
2010 Atelier international bipartite sur la gestion durable ... (Approved)   30,000 USD
2002 Mount Nimba Biodiversity Conservation project (Approved)   30,000 USD
2001 Training workshop for awarenes raising on the Mount ... (Approved)   10,000 USD
2001 Réunion tripartite Guinée-Côte d'Ivoire-Libéria sur les ... (Approved)   20,000 USD
2000 Evaluation mission to mount Nimba World Heritage site ... (Approved)   30,000 USD
1997 Purchase of hydrological and meteorological equipment ... (Approved)   19,840 USD
1995 Establishment of an administrative centre for Mount ... (Approved)   18,000 USD
1993 Equipment and experts service for Mount Nimba (Approved)   45,000 USD
1993 Financial contribution for consultancies and other ... (Approved)   30,000 USD
1993 Consultancies and other services necessary for setting ... (Approved)   30,000 USD
1992 Organization of an interdisciplinary mission to ... (Approved)   35,000 USD
1992 Organization of a technical meeting for authorities of ... (Approved)   19,500 USD
1989 Purchase of an all terrain vehicle for Mount Nimba (Approved)   20,000 USD
1988 Consultancy mission and meeting for preparing ... (Approved)   15,000 USD
1986 Equipment for Mount Nimba Reserve (Approved)   6,500 USD
1983 Financial contribution to a seminar/workshop on the ... (Approved)   22,000 USD
1983 Consultant services to prepare requests for technical ... (Approved)   6,082 USD
1982 Financial contribution to a tripartite meeting (Guinea, ... (Approved)   8,000 USD
1981 Equipment for Mount Nimba (Approved)   70,300 USD
Missions to the property until 2017**

October/November 1988: World Heritage Centre mission; 1993: Joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission; 1994: IUCN mission; 2000: World Heritage Centre mission; 2007: Joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission to Guinea; 2008: Joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission to Côte d’Ivoire; 2013: Joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2017

On 31 January 2017, the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire submitted its report on the state of conservation of the property, available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/155/documents/, and which reports on the progress in implementing the corrective measures as follows:

  • The revised boundary of the Nature Reserve has increased the area from 5,000 ha to 5,092 ha;
  • The borders between Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea and Liberia have recently been reopened and it is anticipated that transboundary management activities will resume in 2017;
  • Surveillance has been strengthened through a UNESCO-funded project and establishment of the ‘west mobile brigade’, which has been operational since March 2016 to undertake anti-poaching patrols. This has led to removal of snares, closure of most of the poaching trails and the use of Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART), which show an increasing trend of direct wildlife observations, and 1000 person-days of patrolling between January and November 2016.

On 13 March 2017, the State Party of Guinea submitted its report on the state of conservation of the property, available also at the above link, and reports the following:

  • The demarcation of the Reserve was completed in 2016;
  • A requirement for companies operating in proximity to the property to have the cumulative impacts of their operations assessed by depositing a common fund to the Guinean Bureau for environmental studies and assessments, which will recruit a company to undertake this assessment;
  • 7 ha of degraded land in the Reserve was restored, and tree nurseries were established by the West Africa Exploration (WAE) Company and the Societé des Mines de Fer de Guinée (SMFG). SMFG also continued to collect data on biodiversity to prepare for an environmental assessment;
  • The boundaries of the exploration permit granted to SAMA Resources Company has been redefined;
  • A new department has been created to monitor Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for mining projects;
  • Awareness-raising workshops and meetings were organized, anti-poaching patrols were conducted and ecological monitoring was undertaken within the Reserve;
  • A corps of 100 paramilitary forces has been established for the management and surveillance of the Biosphere Reserve (within which the property is located). However, insufficient resources (funding and equipment) continue to pose a challenge.
  • A protocol for the collaboration of managers in Guinea and Liberia was prepared in 2016.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2017

The continued efforts made by both States Parties in undertaking anti-poaching patrols and conducting ecological monitoring, as well as the continued actions to raise awareness of local communities by the State Party of Guinea, are appreciated. The increase in wildlife observations, as noted by the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire, is a positive finding.

The impacts of the Ebola crisis have continued to seriously affect the implementation of the corrective measures, but it is noted that with the recent reopening of the borders, progress is anticipated in the coming year. In particular, it is important that ecological monitoring be harmonized between the States Parties, and that joint surveillance operations are organized as soon as possible. The development of a protocol for collaboration of managers between Guinea and Liberia is appreciated in this regard, and should be extended to include Côte d’Ivoire. However, to further support transboundary coordination and in order to promote the implementation of the corrective measures, it is recommended that the Committee reiterate once more its request to both States Parties to collaborate with UNDP and the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) to develop the second phase of the Nimba Project, to concern the entire property. This is particularly important considering the limited resources available, as reported by the State Party of Guinea. 

Moreover, the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) and the corresponding set of indicators have not yet been developed, and both States Parties should be requested to establish these in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN.

Although the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire provided further details of the drafting process of the decree for the redefinition of the boundaries, it does not confirm that the revised boundaries do not erroneously exclude degraded areas of the property containing cocoa plantations. While the area of the revised boundaries is slightly larger than before, the map provided does not enable a comparison with the current boundaries of the property, and therefore it is recommended that the Committee request the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to confirm that the decree does not exclude degraded areas from the property.

It is not clear from the report of the State Party of Guinea whether the restoration of degraded land by WAE and SMFG was undertaken within the property or in the larger Biosphere Reserve. The continued collection of biodiversity data by SMFG to gather baseline information to inform an ESIA is noted. However, it is regrettable that no update was provided by the State Party of Guinea on the preparation of an ESIA by WAE to international standards, and that little information is provided on the status of the development of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for all planned mining projects that could impact on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). In that regard, it is recommended that the Committee reiterate its position regarding the fact that mining exploration and exploitation is incompatible with World Heritage status, and that it request the State Party to ensure that no mining will be permitted outside the boundaries of the property if it could have a negative impact on OUV.

It is noted that the boundaries of the exploration permit granted to SAMA Resources Company have been redefined, however, no further details have been provided. It is therefore recommended that the Committee request the State Party of Guinea to submit to the World Heritage Centre a map of the revised permit boundaries in relation to the property.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2017
41 COM 7A.6
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d’Ivoire/Guinea) (N 155bis)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/17/41.COM/7A,
  2. Recalling Decision 40 COM 7A.36, adopted at its 40th session (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016),
  3. Notes with appreciation the continued actions by the States Parties to undertake anti-poaching patrols and ecological monitoring;
  4. Noting that the borders between Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea and Liberia have reopened, reiterates its request to the States Parties of Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea to implement a joint monitoring system of the property to control all anthropogenic pressures, and to collaborate with UNDP and Global Environmental Facility (GEF) to develop the second phase of the Nimba Project, to concern the entire property, in order to promote the implementation of the corrective measures to safeguard the integrity of the property;
  5. Welcomes the development of a protocol for collaboration of managers between Guinea and Liberia, and encourages all three States Parties, to consider extending this protocol to also include Côte d’Ivoire;
  6. Requests the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to provide further details on the decree for the redefinition of the boundaries, in order to confirm that it does not exclude degraded areas of the property;
  7. Also reiterates its request to the State Party of Guinea to strictly ensure that the preparation of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the West Africa Exploration Company is in accordance with international standards as requested previously, and to submit this ESIA to the World Heritage Centre, for review by IUCN, before authorizing the project, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;
  8. Further reiterates its request to the State Party of Guinea to develop a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in line with international standards, to qualify and quantify all the potential cumulative impacts of all planned mining projects in proximity to the property on its Outstanding Universal Value, in line with the IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment, and submit the report to the World Heritage Centre, for review by IUCN, before making any decision on these projects, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;
  9. Reminds the State Party of Guinea of its position regarding the fact that mining exploration and exploitation is incompatible with World Heritage status, policy supported by the declaration of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) not to undertake such activities in World Heritage properties, and also requests the State Party to continue its efforts in order to ensure that no mining will be permitted outside the boundaries of the property if it could have a negative impact on OUV;
  10. Further requests the States Parties, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, to prepare a Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) and the corresponding set of indicators;
  11. Requests furthermore the State Party of Guinea to submit a map of the revised boundaries of the exploration permit granted to SAMA Resources Company in relation to the property;
  12. Requests moreover the States Parties to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2018, a joint 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 42nd session in 2018;
  13. Decides to retain Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
41 COM 8C.2
Update of the List of World Heritage in Danger (Retained Properties)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC/17/41.COM/7A, WHC/17/41.COM/7A.Add and WHC/17/41.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 41 COM 7A.54)
    • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 41 COM 7A.55)
    • Belize, Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Decision 41 COM 7A.2)
    • Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosí (Decision 41 COM 7A.23)
    • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.4)
    • Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 41 COM 7A.24)
    • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 41 COM 7A.6)
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.7)
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.8)
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 41 COM 7A.9)
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.10)
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.11)
    • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 41 COM 7A.32)
    • Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 41 COM 7A.3)
    • Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 41 COM 7A.18)
    • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 41 COM 7A.33)
    • Iraq, Hatra (Decision 41 COM 7A.34)
    • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 41 COM 7A.35)
    • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 41 COM 7A.36)
    • Libya, Archaeological Site of Cyrene (Decision 41 COM 7A.37)
    • Libya, Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna (Decision 41 COM 7A.38)
    • Libya, Archaeological Site of Sabratha (Decision 41 COM 7A.39)
    • Libya, Old Town of Ghadamès (Decision 41 COM 7A.40)
    • Libya, Rock-Art Sites of Tadrart Acacus (Decision 41 COM 7A.41)
    • Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 41 COM 7A.14)
    • Mali, Old Towns of Djenné (Decision 41 COM 7A.28)
    • Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 41 COM 7A.29)
    • Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 41 COM 7A.30)
    • Micronesia (Federated States of), Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Decision 41 COM 7A.56)
    • Niger, Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 41 COM 7A.15)
    • Palestine, Birthplace of Jesus: Church of the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Route, Bethlehem (Decision 41 COM 7A.42)
    • Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 41 COM 7A.43)
    • Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 41 COM 7A.25)
    • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 41 COM 7A.26)
    • Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.16)
    • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 41 COM 7A.21)
    • Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 41 COM 7A.19)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 41 COM 7A.44)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 41 COM 7A.45)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 41 COM 7A.46)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 41 COM 7A.47)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 41 COM 7A.48)
    • Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 41 COM 7A.49)
    • Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 41 COM 7A.31)
    • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (Decision 41 COM 7A.22)
    • United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 41 COM 7A.17)
    • United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 41 COM 7A.1)
    • Uzbekistan, Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz (Decision 41 COM 7A.57)
    • Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Coro and its Port (Decision 41 COM 7A.27)
    • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 41 COM 7A.51)
    • Yemen, Old City of Sana’a (Decision 41 COM 7A.52)
    • Yemen, Old Walled City of Shibam (Decision 41 COM 7A.53)
      Draft Decision: 41 COM 7A.6

      The World Heritage Committee,

      1. Having examined Document WHC/17/41.COM/7A,
      2. Recalling Decision 40 COM 7A.36, adopted at its 40th session (Istanbul/UNESCO, 2016),
      3. Notes with appreciation the continued actions by the States Parties to undertake anti-poaching patrols and ecological monitoring;
      4. Noting that the borders between Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea and Liberia have reopened, reiterates its request to the States Parties of Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea to implement a joint monitoring system of the property to control all anthropogenic pressures, and to collaborate with UNDP and Global Environmental Facility (GEF) to develop the second phase of the Nimba Project, to concern the entire property, in order to promote the implementation of the corrective measures to safeguard the integrity of the property;
      5. Welcomes the development of a protocol for collaboration of managers between Guinea and Liberia, and encourages all three States Parties, to consider extending this protocol to also include Côte d’Ivoire;
      6. Requests the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to provide further details on the decree for the redefinition of the boundaries, in order to confirm that it does not exclude degraded areas of the property;
      7. Also reiterates its request to the State Party of Guinea to strictly ensure that the preparation of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the West Africa Exploration Company is in accordance with international standards as requested previously, and to submit this ESIA to the World Heritage Centre, for review by IUCN, before authorizing the project, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;
      8. Further reiterates its request to the State Party of Guinea to develop a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in line with international standards, to qualify and quantify all the potential cumulative impacts of all planned mining projects in proximity to the property on its Outstanding Universal Value, in line with the IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment, and submit the report to the World Heritage Centre, for review by IUCN, before making any decision on these projects, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;
      9. Reminds the State Party of Guinea of its position regarding the fact that mining exploration and exploitation is incompatible with World Heritage status, policy supported by the declaration of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) not to undertake such activities in World Heritage properties, and also requests the State Party to continue its efforts in order to ensure that no mining will be permitted outside the boundaries of the property if it could have a negative impact on OUV;
      10. Further requests the States Parties, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, to prepare a Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) and the corresponding set of indicators;
      11. Requests furthermore the State Party of Guinea to submit a map of the revised boundaries of the exploration permit granted to SAMA Resources Company in relation to the property;
      12. Requests moreover the States Parties to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2018, a joint 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 42nd session in 2018;
      13. Decides to retain Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
      Report year: 2017
      Côte d'Ivoire Guinea
      Date of Inscription: 1981
      Category: Natural
      Criteria: (ix)(x)
      Danger List (dates): 1992-present
      Documents examined by the Committee
      SOC Report by the State Party
      Report (2017) .pdf
      Report (2017) .pdf
      arrow_circle_right 41COM (2017)
      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