Borobudur Temple Compounds

• Ineffectual legal and institutional framework for the management and protection of the property (issue resolved);
• Impacts on the stone of Borobudur Temple from the use of epoxy resin, steam cleaning and water repellants (issue resolved).

Total amount provided to the property: USD 7,000,000 under the UNESCO International Safeguarding Campaign for Borobudur (1972-1983); USD 35,000 from the UNESCO/Netherlands Funds-in-Trust to provide technical support for the enhancement of the management effectiveness (2005-2006); close to USD 2,000,000 between 2011 and 2020 in the framework of the Emergency safeguarding activities for the Borobudur Temple Compounds implemented by UNESCO Office in Jakarta with funding support from the Federal Republic of Germany and Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and other partners.

On 8 April 2020, the World Heritage Centre requested that the State Party of Indonesia clarify information provided by a third party about the proposed construction of tourism facilities within and around the property. On 23 October 2020, following further receipt of third-party information indicating that construction works for a Visitor Concourse had commenced, the World Heritage Centre requested again the State Party to submit a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) and supporting documents, in conformity with Paragraphs 118bis and 174 of the Operational Guidelines.

The State Party advised by letter dated 23 October 2020 that an expert team would prepare an HIA on the projects, an Integrated Tourism Management Plan of Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan (ITMP BYP), and a Borobudur Visitor Management Plan (BVMP). On 10 December 2020, the World Heritage Centre received the HIA (executive summary only), a Concept and Development Program, and a Design Plan Borobudur.

On 9 March 2021, the World Heritage Centre provided the State Party with a preliminary ICOMOS Technical Review of the submitted documents and requested the State Party to submit a report on the state of conservation of the property. The Centre reiterated its request to halt the projects, as previously expressed in letters dated 23 October, 4 November 2020 and 12 January 2021, and during an online meeting with the State Party on 5 November 2020.

On 5 and 9 April 2021, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report along with a Management Plan for Borobudur Temple Compounds (MP), the full HIA report, a Detailed Engineering Design of the projects, and Comments from the Borobudur Conservation Office (BCO). The report is available at http://whc.unesco.org/document/186919 and provides the following information:

• In 2019, Borobudur region was designated as one of five Super Priority Destinations in Indonesia, and subsequently a development plan for the region was devised, comprising the following development components: 1) Construction of Culture District Identity Gates; 2) Construction of Culture Axis Pathways between Mendut–Pawon–Borobudur temples; 3) Development of Borobudur Concourse Area; and 4) Relocation of the Borobudur Commercial and Parking Area;
• The HIA indicates that these projects may impact the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, especially as they affect the property’s setting and the landscapes surrounding each component, the areas between them (Identity Gates, Axis Pathways, and Commercial and Parking Area), and the property itself (Concourse Area);
• The BCO comments indicate that the design of the proposed projects is not based on the Integrated Tourism Management Plan (ITMP BYP), and express concerns about negative impacts on the OUV of the property;
• The Management Plan for the property identifies other issues with the conservation and management of the property: a lack of harmonization and overlap between inconsistent regulations; unfair income redistribution; the absence of an integrated management body responsible for the property and its surroundings as a whole; lack of ownership and involvement of local communities as stakeholders in conservation and management.

It is of serious concern that the property and its surrounding area have been subject to extensive tourism development, which has already commenced, yet no report was provided by the State Party until the receipt of third-party information. The development projects proposed within and in the vicinity of the property could potentially have the negative impacts on its OUV, in particular on the setting and surrounding landscapes, as indicated in the HIA and the BCO comments. Completion of the projects would further increase visitation, although the current level is already beyond the ideal carrying capacity identified in the MP. There is no comprehensive tourism management plan defining a general policy for tourism development in the region, consistent with the OUV of the property, nor minimum standards for individual projects. The Committee may wish to request the State Party to submit the ITMP BYP and BVMP as an overarching framework for tourism development in the Borobudur region.

The Committee should also request the State Party to revise the project and the HIA in accordance with the preliminary ICOMOS Technical Review. The revised HIA should include identified missing information, including the composition and assignment of the HIA consultants, the methodology used for the study, and an analysis of the impact of the construction process and future use of the proposed new structures. The State Party should be urged to suspend all development projects within and around the property until the ITMP BYP and BVMP, the revised projects, the updated HIA and the MP are submitted, reviewed by ICOMOS, revised if necessary and adopted. This process should allow for the possibility that one or more of the proposed projects may not proceed at all, owing to potential impacts on the OUV of the property.

Jurisdiction over the property management is divided between different entities (property: BCO under the Ministry of Education and Culture; buffer zone: PT Taman Wisata Candi Borobudur Prambanan and Ratu Bako under the Ministry of State-Owned Enterprises; outside the buffer zone: Regional Government of Magelang Regency under the Ministry of Home Affairs). This complex management arrangement results in a lack of communication and inequality between authorities regarding conservation resources, relative to benefits from development. Community representatives are not sufficiently involved, and benefits from tourism have not been shared with the community at large. The Committee should request the State Party to establish an integrated management body covering whole of the Borobudur National Strategic Area, in line with the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2010. The management body should include relevant stakeholders from the national and regional governments, private sector partners and local communities. The Ministry of Education and Culture and BCO should take a leading role in developing and operating the management body.

Law Number 11 of 2010 outlines provisions for the preparation of HIAs, but there is no standardized procedure nor technical guidelines. The Committee should encourage the State Party to develop specific HIA mechanisms to be applied to development or restoration projects within and around the property, in compliance with the 2011 ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for Cultural World Heritage Properties. The Committee should remind the State Party to inform the World Heritage Centre of proposals that may impact the OUV of the property, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, and to submit HIAs and associated documents for review by the Advisory Bodies before making any decision that would be difficult to reverse.