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

Tiwanaku: Spiritual and Political Centre of the Tiwanaku Culture

Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Factors affecting the property in 2021*
  • Governance
  • Housing
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Lack of a management plan (issue resolved)
  • Governance
  • Lack of coordinated conservation policies and interventions between the national government and local stakeholders
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Legal framework
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Urban high rise/ urban sprawl
  • Lack of conservation policy
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2021

Total amount granted: USD 870,000 for the project “Preservation and Conservation of Tiwanaku and the Akapana Pyramid” (UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust for World Heritage), finalized in 2018

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2021
Requests approved: 1 (from 1995-1995)
Total amount approved : 4,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2021**

August 2002: Experts Mission; November 2007: World Heritage Centre Preparatory mission; February-March 2009: World Heritage Centre Technical mission for the implementation of the JFIT project; November 2009: World Heritage Centre/UNESCO Quito Office Monitoring mission; November 2010: World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission; August 2012: World Heritage Centre mission; April 2014: ICOMOS Advisory mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2021

On 2 January 2020, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report (in Spanish only), which is available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/567/documents/ and reports the following:

  • The UNESCO/Japan Funds-in-Trust (JFIT) cooperation in the project “Preservation and conservation of Tiwanaku and the Akapana Pyramid” has made essential contributions to addressing key issues of the conservation and management of the property, including the preparation of the Management Plan and Integral Conservation Plan (ICP), approved by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in November 2017 and December 2018 respectively; the creation of a conservation area, reinforced with laboratory equipment; tourism management; mapping of the property through remote sensing; improvement of the archives of the Archaeological, Anthropological and Administrative Research Centre of Tiwanaku (CIAAAT); and registry and catalogue systems;
  • ICOMOS’ comments on the Management Plan are being considered and the status of their implementation is described in detail;
  • While the Management and Conservation Plans ensure the preservation of the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, the State Party report clarifies that it is not within the competence of the CIAAAT, which is the management authority, to define the limits of the urban and rural areas; this is the exclusive responsibility of the Municipality of Tiwanaku. The municipality had proposed to include the entire property within the urban area, but this was objected to by the 23 rural communities concerned and, to date, no agreement has been reached between the parties;
  • Regulations have been agreed between the Municipality of Tiwanaku and the CIAAAT for the management and conservation of the buffer zone;
  • The growth of the village of Tiwanaku is affecting the archaeological landscape. Once the zoning characteristics of the area have been defined, the buffer zone regulations need to be formalised by the municipality;
  • The effects of climate change and the El Niño phenomena will be addressed in a Risk Management Plan that will be prepared in 2020;
  • The main threats to the property are the urban expansion of the village of Tiwanaku, the lack of definition of the urban and rural zones, and constructions in the possible buffer zone extension due to lack of regulations.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2021

It is welcomed that the State Party is considering ICOMOS’ recommendations regarding the 2017 Management Plan.

The December 2019 ICOMOS Technical Review of the ICP strongly supports the vision that it is essential to approach the property as part of a very extensive archaeological landscape (up to 650 hectares) and to address the conservation of the landscape, architecture, archaeological deposits, and artifacts, both within and outside the property, in an integrated manner. In order to strengthen the ICP, the State Party should be recommended to consider the advice of the Technical Review concerning ongoing archaeological condition assessment, the establishment of a cyclical maintenance programme for the property, and attention required for deposits outside the museum, among others.

It is noted that neither the State Party report nor the ICP address the previous request of the World Heritage Committee to give priority to efforts to guarantee the optimal state of conservation of the identified attributes that convey the property’s OUV prior to pursuing any new archaeological projects. In this sense, the proposal in the ICP to undertake three new excavations as part of a communication strategy to showcase the extension to the archaeological area should be carefully and strategically re-considered.

The preparation of a Risk Management Plan in 2020 is welcomed, and it is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to submit it to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies as soon as it becomes available.

It should be recalled that, for many years, the World Heritage Committee has been calling upon the State Party to expand the buffer zone of the property and to define the urban and rural zones with their specific regulations. It is of extreme concern that no progress has been made in any of these areas. The existing buffer zone of 100 metres around the three areas that make up the property has proven to be insufficient to prevent inappropriate constructions and intrusions. In addition, an assessment should be undertaken of the implications of the eventual designation of the property and its existing and/or proposed buffer zone as urban or rural zones. It is recommended that the Committee also request the State Party to clarify this as early as possible.

The continued urban expansion of the village of Tiwanaku and the absence of an appropriate buffer zone and regulations could be considered as a potential threat to the property’s OUV. The Committee should therefore urge the State Party to formalize the buffer zone extension and regulations for the urban and rural zones, and to submit a formal minor boundary modification request, as per Paragraph 164 of the Operational Guidelines.

It is welcomed that the CIAAAT collaborates intensively with the local authorities and communities in decision-making processes regarding planning, conservation and management. It is recommended that the Committee encourage the State Party to continue this effort.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2021
44 COM 7B.63
Tiwanaku: Spiritual and Political Centre of the Tiwanaku Culture (Bolivia, Plurinational State of) (C 567rev)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7B,
  2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7B.34, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
  3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit its report in one of the two working languages of the World Heritage Convention (French or English);
  4. Welcomes the adoption of the Management Plan (2017) and the Integral Conservation Plan (ICP)(2018), and recommends that the State Party consider and implement ICOMOS’ observations and advice regarding the ICP;
  5. Recalls its earlier request to the State Party to give priority to efforts to guarantee the optimal state of conservation of the identified attributes that convey the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) prior to pursuing any new archaeological projects, and requests the State Party to reconsider the opening of three new excavation zones as proposed in the ICP;
  6. Also welcomes the preparation of the Risk Management Plan, and also requests the State Party to submit this plan to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies as soon as it becomes available;
  7. Expresses its serious concern that the State Party has not taken any action to expand the buffer zone as requested by the Committee at its previous sessions, and that the continued expansion of the village of Tiwanaku and inappropriate constructions and land use threaten the OUV of the property, and urges the State Party to:
    1. Proceed urgently with the extension of the buffer zone and the submission of a formal Minor Boundary Modification request, as per Paragraph 164 of the Operational Guidelines,
    2. Define urban and rural zones and assess the implications of such designations on the conservation and management of the property and the buffer zone,
    3. Take the corresponding regulatory measures to ensure the protection of the property’s OUV and conditions of authenticity and integrity;
  8. Further requests the State Party to reinforce its collaboration and communication with the local authorities and communities regarding the conservation and management of the property;
  9. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 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 46th session.
Draft Decision: 44 COM 7B.63

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7B,
  2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7B.34, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
  3. Regrets that the State Party did not submit its report in one of the two working languages of the World Heritage Convention (French or English);
  4. Welcomes the adoption of the Management Plan (2017) and the Integral Conservation Plan (ICP)(2018), and recommends that the State Party consider and implement ICOMOS’ observations and advice regarding the ICP;
  5. Recalls its earlier request to the State Party to give priority to efforts to guarantee the optimal state of conservation of the identified attributes that convey the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) prior to pursuing any new archaeological projects, and requests the State Party to reconsider the opening of three new excavation zones as proposed in the ICP;
  6. Also welcomes the preparation of the Risk Management Plan, and also requests the State Party to submit this plan to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies as soon as it becomes available;
  7. Expresses its serious concern that the State Party has not taken any action to expand the buffer zone as requested by the Committee at its previous sessions, and that the continued expansion of the village of Tiwanaku and inappropriate constructions and land use threaten the OUV of the property, and urges the State Party to:
    1. Proceed urgently with the extension of the buffer zone and the submission of a formal Minor Boundary Modification request, as per Paragraph 164 of the Operational Guidelines,
    2. Define urban and rural zones and assess the implications of such designations on the conservation and management of the property and the buffer zone,
    3. Take the corresponding regulatory measures to ensure the protection of the property’s OUV and conditions of authenticity and integrity;
  8. Further requests the State Party to reinforce its collaboration and communication with the local authorities and communities regarding the conservation and management of the property;
  9. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 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 46th session in 2023.
Report year: 2021
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Date of Inscription: 2000
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)(iv)
Documents examined by the Committee
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2020) .pdf
Initialy proposed for examination in 2020
arrow_circle_right 44COM (2021)
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