Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve
Factors affecting the property in 2018*
- 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
- Unsatisfactory transboundary 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 2018
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 2018
Total amount approved : 512,588 USD
Missions to the property until 2018**
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 2018
On 3 March 2018, the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/155/documents, providing the following information:
- To date, no joint monitoring system exists since the occurrence of the Ebola virus disease in 2014. Contacts between the two countries remain informal due to a lack of finances. An exchange mission between Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire, foreseen in 2017, with a view to extending the protocol for the collaboration of managers between Guinea and Liberia with the aim of including the Côte d’Ivoire, was cancelled for diverse reasons;
- The application of the SMART tool (Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool) has enabled the monitoring of certain species of wildlife as well as anthropogenic activities;
- The Ivorian Office for Parks and Reserves (OIPR) foresees, in 2018, the reactivation of the trans-boundary project for Monts Nimba, prepared during a reflection workshop held in 2013 at Danané, in the framework of the second phase of the Nimba Project, in association with the UNDP and the Global Environment Facility (GEF);
- The redefinition of the boundaries of the property, of which the Committee was informed during its 41st session, does not exclude any degraded areas of the property;
- A proposal for the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) has not yet been prepared, but the State Party expresses its willingness to launch this process in partnership with Guinea, UNESCO and IUCN;
- Funding has been obtained for the next five years in the framework of the Sustainable Agriculture Network of Côte d’Ivoire (FADCI) that will ensure the implementation of the management functions for the property. Certain offices of the OIPR at Danané and Yaleu are being rehabilitated. The state of degradation of the surveillance posts and the access trails of the property remain problematic for the implementation of the corrective measures.
On 2 March 2018, the State Party of Guinea submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property, also available at the above-mentioned Internet address, referring in particular to the activities implemented by the State Party in 2012 and do not highlight the efforts taken since the 41st session of the Committee. With regard to the mining exploration permits, this report confirms that the West Africa Exploration Society (WAE) has prepared an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), a copy of which was sent to the World Heritage Centre in 2015. It is indicated that all the field activities of the Society have been halted following the complaint by the Director-General of the national committee of the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme (MAB) because of the negative impacts noted at the site. The Société des Mines de Fer de Guinée (SMFG) has not yet carried out an ESIA. Its field activities are currently halted. The permit attributed to the SAMA Resources Company was withdrawn in 2014. The report mentions that the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests has given firm instructions to the Centre for Environmental Management of Mount Nimba and Simandou (CEGENS) to prevent all the above-mentioned mining companies from continuing their activities in the property.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2018
The continued efforts of the OIPR to conduct anti-poaching patrols and to ensure ecological monitoring are warmly welcomed. However, the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire has not provided updated data on tendencies observed of the populations of key species of the property, and the data provided on the anthropogenic activities allow no assessment of the global tendency of poaching, although they suggest a decline in hunting in 2017. It is recommended that the Committee request the two States Parties to provide fuller information on the analysis of data gathered to enable an evaluation of the tendencies of anthropogenic activities, including poaching, as well as the populations of key species in the property.
The funding obtained in the framework of the FADCI programme enabling the implementation of the management functions of the Ivorian component of the property is favourably welcomed. Noting the importance of developing trans-border management of the property and in particular the necessary harmonization of ecological monitoring and the establishment of joint surveillance operations, it is recommended that the Committee reiterate its request to the two States Parties to develop a follow-up to the Nimba Project on the property as a whole. The confirmation of the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire that no degraded area is excluded from the Ivoirian component of the property during the redefinition of the boundaries is noted. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to submit a high-resolution map of the updated boundaries.
It is regrettable that the report of the State Party of Guinea contains information that concerns the situation as it was in 2012. The information provided is very ambiguous. The information, according to which all mining activities of the WAE and SMFG Companies are now suspended and that the permit granted to the SAMA Company has been withdrawn since 2014, is noted. However, the World Heritage Centre has received information according to which the suspension of the activities in the WAE concession is more likely linked to financial difficulties of the mother company, Sable Mining. It must also be recalled that the examination by IUCN of the ESIA undertaken by WAE and submitted by the State Party in 2015, noted that the assessment has not been carried out in conformity with international standards as requested by the Committee in its Decision 37 COM 7A.3.
With regard to the SMFG concession, one of the responsible agents confirmed to the World Heritage Centre that the preparations for the ESIA of the project continues but that the mining project was in a state of ‘d’entretien et maintenance’ (“care and maintenance”) awaiting a decision of the Government concerning the disposal route for the minerals.
It should be noted that the World Heritage Centre and IUCN have received information concerning a road development project to facilitate transportation to The Mano River Union, that would comprise the tarmacking of the Lola route (Guinea) – Danané (Côte d’Ivoire) passing by Mount Nimba. The ESIA summary of the project, dated August 2014 and available at the website of the African Development Bank (ADB), does not take into account the presence of a World Heritage property in the areas concerned by the project, but recognizes that the Mount Nimba Reserve would be affected by indirect impacts, notably pollution by visitors’ garbage, poaching and illegal logging. It is regrettable that the States Parties have not informed the World Heritage Centre of this project, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines. On 14 May 2018, a letter was sent by the World Heritage Centre requesting the State Party of Guinea to provide additional information, and it is recommended that the Committee request the States Parties to also provide a full ESIA, assessing the potential impacts of this project on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, in accordance with the IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment.
It is also appropriate that the Committee reiterate its request to the two States Parties to establish, in close cooperation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, the proposal for the DSOCR and all the corresponding indicators.
Considering the mining issue, the issue of the road, the need to develop a DSOCR and that the last Reactive Monitoring mission dates from 2012, it is recommended that the Committee request the States Parties to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission.
Finally, it is recommended that the Committee maintain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2018
42 COM 7A.46
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d’Ivoire/Guinea) (N 155bis)
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC/18/42.COM/7A.Add,
- Recalling Decision 41 COM 7A.6, adopted at its 41st session (Krakow, 2017),
- Warmly welcomes the continued efforts of the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to conduct anti-poaching patrols as well as ecological monitoring and requests the States Parties of Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea to provide additional information on the analysis of the data gathered during the surveillance patrols and the ecological monitoring, to enable an evaluation of the tendencies of anthropogenic activities, including poaching, and that of the populations of the key species in the property;
- Also warmly welcomes the funding obtained to enable the implementation of the management functions of the Ivorian component of the property, expresses its concern as regards the level of formal trans-border collaboration and reiterates its request to the States Parties to develop trans-border management for the property and notably the necessary harmonization of ecological monitoring and the establishment of joint surveillance operations, and to prepare a follow-up of the Nimba Project on the entire property to promote the implementation of the corrective measures;
- Takes note of the confirmation by the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire that no degraded area would be excluded from the Ivorian component of the property during the redefinition of the boundaries of the Reserve and also requests the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to submit to the World Heritage Centre a high-resolution map of the updated boundaries.
- Regrets that the report of the State Party of Guinea does not clearly distinguish the obsolete information from the current information concerning the implementation of the corrective measures;
- Takes note of the information provided by the State Party of Guinea that all mining activities of the WAE and SMFG Companies have now been suspended and that the permit granted to the SAMA Resources Company has been withdrawn since 2014 and also reiterates its request that no new mining exploration and exploitation permits located around the property be granted without a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) being carried out to evaluate the impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, including the accumulative effects of these projects;
- Also regrets that the States Parties have provided no information concerning the road development project to facilitate transport within the Mano River Union, that would include tarmacking the Lola route (Guinea) – Danané (Côte d’Ivoire) passing by Mount Nimba, and further requests the States Parties:
- to provide additional information concerning this project,
- to ensure that the impacts of the project on the OUV of the property are assessed in the framework of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), in conformity with the IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment,
- to submit, as soon as possible, a copy of this ESIA to the World Heritage Centre for examination by IUCN ;
- Further reiterates its request the States Parties to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, a proposed Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) and all the corresponding indicators;
- Moreover requests the States Parties to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission, to assess the state of conservation of the property, to update the corrective measures, propose a timetable for their implementation, develop a proposed DSOCR, and evaluate the current state of the different mining projects surrounding the property;
- Finally requests the States Parties to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2019, an updated joint report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session in 2019;
- Decides to retain Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
42 COM 8C.2
Update of the List of World Heritage in Danger (Retained Properties)
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC/18/42.COM/7A, WHC/18/42.COM/7A.Add and WHC/18/42.COM/7A.Add.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 42 COM 7A.1)
- Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 42 COM 7A.2)
- Austria, Historic Centre of Vienna (Decision 42 COM 7A.5)
- Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosí (Decision 42 COM 7A.8)
- Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.45)
- Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 42 COM 7A.9)
- Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 42 COM 7A.46)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.47)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.48)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 42 COM 7A.49)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.50)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.51)
- Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 42 COM 7A.17)
- Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 42 COM 7A.44)
- Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 42 COM 7A.40)
- Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 42 COM 7A.18)
- Iraq, Hatra (Decision 42 COM 7A.19)
- Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 42 COM 7A.20)
- Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 42 COM 7A.21)
- Libya, Archaeological Site of Cyrene (Decision 42 COM 7A.22)
- Libya, Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna (Decision 42 COM 7A.23)
- Libya, Archaeological Site of Sabratha (Decision 42 COM 7A.24)
- Libya, Old Town of Ghadamès (Decision 42 COM 7A.25)
- Libya, Rock-Art Sites of Tadrart Acacus (Decision 42 COM 7A.26)
- Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 42 COM 7A.53)
- Mali, Old Towns of Djenné (Decision 42 COM 7A.13)
- Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 42 COM 7A.14)
- Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 42 COM 7A.15)
- Micronesia (Federated States of), Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Decision 42 COM 7A.3)
- Niger, Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 42 COM 7A.54)
- Palestine, Birthplace of Jesus: Church of the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Route, Bethlehem (Decision 42 COM 7A.27)
- Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 42 COM 7A.29)
- Palestine, Hebron/Al-Khalil Old Town (Decision 42 COM 7A.28)
- Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 42 COM 7A.10)
- Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 42 COM 7A.11)
- Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.55)
- Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 42 COM 7A.6)
- Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 42 COM 7A.41)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 42 COM 7A.30)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 42 COM 7A.31)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 42 COM 7A.32)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 42 COM 7A.33)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 42 COM 7A.34)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 42 COM 7A.35)
- Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 42 COM 7A.16)
- United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (Decision 42 COM 7A.7)
- United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 42 COM 7A.56)
- United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 42 COM 7A.42)
- Uzbekistan, Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz (Decision 42 COM 7A.4)
- Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Coro and its Port (Decision 42 COM 7A.12)
- Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 42 COM 7A.37)
- Yemen, Old City of Sana’a (Decision 42 COM 7A.38)
- Yemen, Old Walled City of Shibam (Decision 42 COM 7A.39)
Draft Decision: 42 COM 7A.46
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC/18/42.COM/7A.Add,
- Recalling Decision 41 COM 7A.6, adopted at its 41st session (Krakow, 2017),
- Warmly welcomes the continued efforts of the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to conduct anti-poaching patrols as well as ecological monitoring and requests the States Parties of Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea to provide additional information on the analysis of the data gathered during the surveillance patrols and the ecological monitoring, to enable an evaluation of the tendencies of anthropogenic activities, including poaching, and that of the populations of the key species in the property;
- Also warmly welcomes the funding obtained to enable the implementation of the management functions of the Ivorian component of the property, expresses its concern as regards the level of formal trans-border collaboration and reiterates its request to the States Parties to develop trans-border management for the property and notably the necessary harmonization of ecological monitoring and the establishment of joint surveillance operations, and to prepare a follow-up of the Nimba Project on the entire property to promote the implementation of the corrective measures;
- Takes note of the confirmation by the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire that no degraded area would be excluded from the Ivorian component of the property during the redefinition of the boundaries of the Reserve and also requests the State Party of Côte d’Ivoire to submit to the World Heritage Centre a high-resolution map of the updated boundaries.
- Regrets that the report of the State Party of Guinea does not clearly distinguish the obsolete information from the current information concerning the implementation of the corrective measures;
- Takes note of the information provided by the State Party of Guinea that all mining activities of the WAE and SMFG Companies have now been suspended and that the permit granted to the SAMA Resources Company has been withdrawn since 2014 and also reiterates its request that no new mining exploration and exploitation permits located around the property be granted without a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) being carried out to evaluate the impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, including the accumulative effects of these projects;
- Also regrets that the States Parties have provided no information concerning the road development project to facilitate transport within the Mano River Union, that would include tarmacking the Lola route (Guinea) – Danané (Côte d’Ivoire) passing by Mount Nimba, and further requests the States Parties:
- to provide additional information concerning this project,
- to ensure that the impacts of the project on the OUV of the property are assessed in the framework of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), in conformity with the IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment,
- to submit, as soon as possible, a copy of this ESIA to the World Heritage Centre for examination by IUCN ;
- Further reiterates its request the States Parties to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN, a proposed Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) and all the corresponding indicators;
- Moreover requests the States Parties to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission, to assess the state of conservation of the property, to update the corrective measures, propose a timetable for their implementation, develop a proposed DSOCR, and evaluate the current state of the different mining projects surrounding the property;
- Finally requests the States Parties to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2019, an updated joint report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session in 2019;
- Decides to retain Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Côte d'Ivoire 
Guinea
Documents examined by the Committee
42COM (2018)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.
