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

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
State of Conservation Nan Madol: Ceremonial ... 2021

Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia

Micronesia (Federated States of)
Factors affecting the property in 2021*
  • Erosion and siltation/ deposition
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Legal framework (Legislation LB392 not yet passed and implemented)
  • Management systems/Management Plan (Management system not extended enough; Lack of a risk preparedness strategy as well as of a comprehensive tourism strategy into the management plan)
  • Erosion and siltation/ deposition (Need to remove silt from the waterways without jeopardizing possible cultural layers on the sea floor)
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Management system/Management Plan
  • Management activities (Overgrowth of vegetation, Stonework collapse)
  • Storms (Effects of storm surge)
  • Erosion and siltation/ deposition
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger

In progress

Corrective Measures for the property

In progress

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures

In progress

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2021

Total amount provided: USD 120,000 from the UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust for the preparation of a nomination file and the management plan for Nan Madol; USD 26,232 from the UNESCO/Netherlands Funds-in-Trust for technical support to Nan Madol.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2021
Requests approved: 1 (from 2017-2017)
Total amount approved : 30,000 USD
2017 Initial non-invasive clearing of vegetation overgrowth ... (Approved)   30,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2021**

January 2018: World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission

2018 Report of the joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of ...
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2021

On 1 February 2020, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1503/documents/ and provides information on actions undertaken to implement Committee’s previous decisions, as follows:

  • Following the draft Conservation Plan, the State Party and its partners are elaborating a ‘Sustainable Conservation Plan’, to encompass vegetation management as well as interpretation. This plan is due to be finalized by September 2020;
  • The State Party and the NGO Cultural Site Research and Management (CSRM) Foundation are seeking funds from the US Department of State through its Ambassadors Fund for a 2-year implementation project, to commence in October 2020;
  • The plan for vegetation management has been developed with the support of the US Forest Service, and a 2-week vegetation management training programme will be held on Pohnpei in March 2020;
  • Priorities for vegetation management have been established. It is expected that urgent vegetation threats will be removed from the highest priority islets (Nan Dowas, Peinkitel, Pahn Kedira, Peikapw and Idehd) by April 2020. Medium and long-term actions for vegetation management will then be implemented;
  • The legal framework (legislation LB392) is expected to be introduced by the end of March 2020. It will establish the Nan Madol Trust, and the framework for the management structure for the property (including a long-term Property Manager).
  • A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is being developed with the College of Micronesia-FSM to establish a framework for capacity building for the conservation and management of the property, in collaboration with the proposed Nan Madol Trust and the US Department of the Interior;
  • The State Party considers that substantial re-building of masonry structures is undesirable, and is rendered virtually impossible due to the costs, technical challenges and the cultural context of the property, and that stones should only be re-positioned if no other options for stabilizing them are available;
  • A visitor centre is planned and ICOMOS has provided a technical review of the project;
  • A tourism resort is planned for development on Nahnningi Island, within the buffer zone of the property. ICOMOS has provided a technical review and has requested that a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) be prepared.
  • The Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) will be drafted by the State Party by September 2020.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2021

The updated information provided by the State Party should be welcomed, as many actions requested in Decision 43 COM 7A.43 are in progress and expected to reach important milestones during 2020. The collaboration with the CSRM Foundation is noted, along with financial and technical support from the US Forest Service, US Department of State, and the Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation.

It is noted with satisfaction that urgent threats associated with vegetation growth on islets and other structures have already been identified and will be addressed as part of short-term actions during 2020, following a training programme in Pohnpei.

However, little information is provided on the stability of stonework on the property, which is the key attribute of its OUV. Although it is indicated that any programme to reinstate fallen masonry is likely to be impossible given the size of the columns and boulders, it is also suggested that their cultural context might proscribe interventions, and that disturbing stonework should only be undertaken if no other option exists. A non-intervention policy cannot be supported if, over time, this will lead to the attrition of attributes. It is important to determine which parts of the stonework can be safely monitored and which parts need interventions to ensure their safety and stability. This conservation aspect needs to be urgently addressed and related to vegetation management.

A recent report from the company Arbor Global confirms that Nan Madol is deteriorating at an alarming rate, despite the progress made to address some urgent pressures. This reinforces the importance of planned vegetation management measures, as advancing vegetation is the main driver of masonry collapse, and of clearing canals to improve hydrology, including by removing footpaths and bridges.

The development of a Sustainable Conservation Plan that will allow the property to work towards sustainability in terms of vegetation, site management and interpretation is to be welcomed, but this must address the complex interaction between deterioration of stonework and vegetation and canal management and must also encompass tourism.

The Tourism Strategy requested by the Committee is yet to be developed. In addition to a wide range of tourism planning issues, this is urgent to identify which parts of the property can be accessible to visitors, so that conservation implications can be prioritized. The recent CSRM Foundation report recommends that tourism activities be developed in the wider area in order to manage pressures on the property itself and has proposed the acquisition of LiDAR data for the whole of Pohnpei to assist longer-term planning.

Furthermore, in advance of the tourism strategy work, it is noted with concern that work has started on building a tourist resort on Nahnningi Island, in full view from the property. The recommendations of ICOMOS’ technical review to halt construction until full details have been provided and properly assessed should be followed. It is noted that the State Party is preparing to conduct an HIA for the project, but it has not provided confirmation that work has been halted. Accordingly, it is strongly recommended that the Committee request the State Party to halt this development so that the recommendations of the ICOMOS technical review can be fully addressed.

The circumstances of this project demonstrate the urgent need for adequate legal protection for the property and its buffer zone, and the need for HIA to be incorporated as a component of the property’s management system for all projects before any approval is given. Carrying out HIAs retrospectively is not a satisfactory way to proceed.

It is noted with concern that the key components of the legal protection and management system are not yet finalized or implemented, with draft legislation still pending. It is recommended that the Committee encourage the State Party to finalize this process, along with the Sustainable Conservation Plan, Site Management Plan, Interpretation Plan and Tourism Plan as matters of high priority. It is also noted that the ‘Property Manager’ continues as an interim arrangement only.

Finally, existing and new international partners are invited to provide funding and technical support to the State Party in progressing towards further capacity building and the development of the DSOCR.

In view of the above, it would be therefore appropriate for the property to remain on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2021
44 COM 7A.30
Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Micronesia, Federated States of) (C 1503)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7A,
  2. Recalling Decision 43 COM 7A.43 adopted at its 43rd session (Baku, 2019),
  3. Welcomes the updated information provided by the State Party concerning the efforts to establish an effective management and protection system for the property, and to address the urgent pressures and threats affecting its state of conservation;
  4. Notes with satisfaction that funds for a two-year implementation programme are being sought from the US Department of State through its “Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation Large Grants Program”;
  5. Notes that the State Party provides very few details on the stonework, which is the key attribute of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and that reinstating fallen masonry is likely to be impossible given the size of the columns and boulders and might be proscribed by their cultural context;
  6. Considers that a non-intervention policy cannot be supported if, over time, this will lead to the attrition of attributes, and requests the State Party as a matter of urgency to determine which parts of the stonework can be safely monitored and which parts need interventions to ensure their safety and stability;
  7. Also welcomes the development of a Sustainable Conservation Plan that aims to allow the property to achieve sustainability in relation to vegetation management, site management and interpretation through short-, medium- and longer-term actions over five years, but urges the State Party to ensure that this addresses the complex interaction between deterioration of stonework, vegetation and canal management, and requests the State Party to provide feedback on this issue in its future state of conservation report, as masonry stability and resilience is closely related to access issues;
  8. Notes with concern that the recent report from the Cultural Site Research and Management (CSRM) Foundation confirms that the property is deteriorating at an alarming rate, despite the progress made to address some of the most urgent pressures, and highlights the fact that vegetation encroachment is the main cause of masonry deterioration, all of which underscores the need for the Sustainable Conservation Plan;
  9. Reiterates its request to the State Party to develop a Sustainable Tourism Strategy as soon as possible and submit it to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies;
  10. Regrets that work on the development of a tourist resort on Nahnningo Island (in the buffer zone) has commenced in advance of this strategy and without a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) being developed, also requests the State Party to halt the development of this proposed tourism resort until the HIA has been developed and the issues raised in the ICOMOS technical review have been addressed, and further requests the State Party to submit the HIA to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies before work resumes;
  11. Strongly encourages the State Party to regularly provide updated information to the World Heritage Centre, and to continue these efforts as a matter of high priority, including:
    1. Establishing a long-term commitment to the post of ‘Property Manager’,
    2. Finalizing and approving legislation LB392 to provide legal protection to the property and establish the Nan Madol Trust,
    3. Completing and finalizing the Sustainable Conservation Plan, Site Management Plan and Interpretation Plan for the property, and submitting them to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies,
    4. Developing the Tourism Plan and implementing a sustainable tourism programme that includes activities and destinations beyond the property, and submitting this plan to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies,
    5. Establishing processes for HIAs as part of the management system,
    6. Implementing the short-term actions identified for vegetation management in the highest priority areas of the property,
    7. Developing measures to clear the canals and improve their hydrology,
    8. Developing and implementing, as part of the management plan, a system to monitor the health of the mangroves;
  12. Notes furthermore the need for continuing international cooperation and partnerships to develop the long-term capacity of the State Party, Pohnpei State and local communities to conserve and manage the property, and encourages the State Party to continue to develop collaborations that will enable the creation of a dedicated capacity-building programme, as recommended by the 2018 Reactive Monitoring mission and the draft Conservation Plan;
  13. Requests furthermore the State Party to provide to the World Heritage Centre detailed information on any project that may have an impact on the OUV of the property and on any HIAs carried out according to the 2011 ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for World Heritage cultural properties, and in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, for review by the Advisory Bodies, before any decision is made that would be difficult to reverse and/or any project is implemented;
  14. Calls upon the international community to provide technical and financial support for the safeguarding of the property, in cooperation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;
  15. Requests moreover the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2022, 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 45th session;
  16. Decides to retain Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Micronesia (Federated States of)) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Read more
44 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/21/44.COM/7A, WHC/21/44.COM/7A.Add, WHC/21/44.COM/7A.Add.2, WHC/21/44.COM/7A.Add.2.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 44 COM 7A.28)
  • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 44 COM 7A.29)
  • Austria, Historic Centre of Vienna (Decision 44 COM 7A.32)
  • Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosí (Decision 44 COM 7A.35)
  • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.39)
  • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 44 COM 7A.40)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.41)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.42)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 44 COM 7A.43)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.45)
  • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 44 COM 7A.5)
  • Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 44 COM 7A.55)
  • Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 44 COM 7A.52)
  • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 44 COM 7A.6)
  • Iraq, Hatra (Decision 44 COM 7A.7)
  • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 44 COM 7A.8)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 44 COM 7A.10)
  • Kenya, Lake Turkana National Parks (Decision 44 COM 7A.47)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Cyrene (Decision 44 COM 7A.11)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna (Decision 44 COM 7A.12)
  • Libya, Archaeological Site of Sabratha (Decision 44 COM 7A.13)
  • Libya, Old Town of Ghadamès (Decision 44 COM 7A.14)
  • Libya, Rock-Art Sites of Tadrart Acacus (Decision 44 COM 7A.15)
  • Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 44 COM 7A.48)
  • Mali, Old Towns of Djenné (Decision 44 COM 7A.1)
  • Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 44 COM 7A.2)
  • Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 44 COM 7A.3)
  • Mexico, Islands and Protected Areas of the Gulf of California (Decision 44 COM 7B.56)
  • Micronesia (Federated States of), Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Decision 44 COM 7A.30)
  • Niger, Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 44 COM 7A.49)
  • Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 44 COM 7A.17)
  • Palestine, Hebron/Al-Khalil Old Town (Decision 44 COM 7A.16)
  • Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 44 COM 7A.36)
  • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 44 COM 7A.37)
  • Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.50)
  • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 44 COM 7A.33)
  • Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 44 COM 7A.53)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 44 COM 7A.18)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 44 COM 7A.19)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 44 COM 7A.20)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 44 COM 7A.21)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 44 COM 7A.22)
  • Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 44 COM 7A.23)
  • Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 44 COM 7A.4)
  • United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 44 COM 7A.51)
  • United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 44 COM 7A.54)
  • Uzbekistan, Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz (Decision 44 COM 7A.31)
  • Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Coro and its Port (Decision 44 COM 7A.38)
  • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 44 COM 7A.25)
  • Yemen, Old City of Sana’a (Decision 44 COM 7A.26)
  • Yemen, Old Walled City of Shibam (Decision 44 COM 7A.27).
Read more
Draft Decision: 44 COM 7A.30

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7A,
  2. Recalling Decision 43 COM 7A.43 adopted at its 43rd session (Baku, 2019),
  3. Welcomes the updated information provided by the State Party concerning the efforts to establish an effective management and protection system for the property, and to address the urgent pressures and threats affecting its state of conservation;
  4. Notes with satisfaction that funds for a two-year implementation programme are being sought from the US Department of State through its “Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation Large Grants Program”;
  5. Notes that the State Party provides very few details on the stonework, which is the key attribute of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and that reinstating fallen masonry is likely to be impossible given the size of the columns and boulders and might be proscribed by their cultural context;
  6. Considers that a non-intervention policy cannot be supported if, over time, this will lead to the attrition of attributes, and requests the State Party as a matter of urgency to determine which parts of the stonework can be safely monitored and which parts need interventions to ensure their safety and stability;
  7. Also welcomes the development of a Sustainable Conservation Plan that aims to allow the property to achieve sustainability in relation to vegetation management, site management and interpretation through short-, medium- and longer-term actions over five years, but urges the State Party to ensure that this addresses the complex interaction between deterioration of stonework, vegetation and canal management, and requests the State Party to provide feedback on this issue in its future state of conservation report, as masonry stability and resilience is closely related to access issues;
  8. Notes with concern that the recent report from the Cultural Site Research and Management (CSRM) Foundation confirms that the property is deteriorating at an alarming rate, despite the progress made to address some of the most urgent pressures, and highlights the fact that vegetation encroachment is the main cause of masonry deterioration, all of which underscores the need for the Sustainable Conservation Plan;
  9. Reiterates its request to the State Party to develop a Sustainable Tourism Strategy as soon as possible and submit it to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies;
  10. Regrets that work on the development of a tourist resort on Nahnningo Island (in the buffer zone) has commenced in advance of this strategy and without a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) being developed, also requests the State Party to halt the development of this proposed tourism resort until the HIA has been developed and the issues raised in the ICOMOS technical review have been addressed, and further requests the State Party to submit the HIA to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies before work resumes;
  11. Strongly encourages the State Party to regularly provide updated information to the World Heritage Centre, and to continue these efforts as a matter of high priority, including:
    1. Establishing a long-term commitment to the post of ‘Property Manager’,
    2. Finalizing and approving legislation LB392 to provide legal protection to the property and establish the Nan Madol Trust,
    3. Completing and finalizing the Sustainable Conservation Plan, Site Management Plan and Interpretation Plan for the property, and submitting them to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies,
    4. Developing the Tourism Plan and implementing a sustainable tourism programme that includes activities and destinations beyond the property, and submitting this plan to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies,
    5. Establishing processes for HIAs as part of the management system,
    6. Implementing the short-term actions identified for vegetation management in the highest priority areas of the property,
    7. Developing measures to clear the canals and improve their hydrology,
    8. Developing and implementing, as part of the management plan, a system to monitor the health of the mangroves;
  12. Notes furthermore the need for continuing international cooperation and partnerships to develop the long-term capacity of the State Party, Pohnpei State and local communities to conserve and manage the property, and encourages the State Party to continue to develop collaborations that will enable the creation of a dedicated capacity-building programme, as recommended by the 2018 Reactive Monitoring mission and the draft Conservation Plan;
  13. Requests furthermore the State Party to provide to the World Heritage Centre detailed information on any project that may have an impact on the OUV of the property and on any HIAs carried out according to the 2011 ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for World Heritage cultural properties, and in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, for review by the Advisory Bodies, before any decision is made that would be difficult to reverse and/or any project is implemented;
  14. Calls upon the international community to provide technical and financial support for the safeguarding of the property, in cooperation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;
  15. Requests moreover the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2022, 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 45th session in 2022;
  16. Decides to retain Nan Madol: Ceremonial Centre of Eastern Micronesia (Micronesia (Federated States of)) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Previous 2019 Next 2023
Report year: 2021
Micronesia (Federated States of)
Date of Inscription: 2016
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iii)(iv)(vi)
Danger List (dates): 2016-present
Documents examined by the Committee
WHC/21/44.COM/7A
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2020) .pdf
Initialy proposed for examination in 2020
arrow_circle_right 44COM (2021)
Exports
Previous 2019 Next 2023

* : 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