Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 2010
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger N/A
Previous Committee Decisions see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1351/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 0
For details, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1351/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Previous monitoring missions
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
Illustrative material see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1351/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2011
On 28 January 2011, the State Party submitted a report responding to Decision 34 COM 8B.41 which relates to the property’s inscription on the World Heritage List by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010). At the time of inscription, it was noted that there was a need to: more clearly explain the choice of sites and how each one contributed to the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV); define and protect the setting of the nominated sites beyond the proposed buffer zones when related to landscape structures; as well as to establish legal protection for all the individual sites and to establish an overall coordinated management system that encompasses all the component parts.
a) Selection of the component sites
The State Party provided information regarding the methodological approach utilized for the selection of the component sites, which was based on the ICOMOS Charter on Cultural Routes. The process entailed identifying the functionality of the cultural route, in this case mining, and the intangible and tangible heritage expressions associated to this function.
The process resulted in the identification of 54 component sites that were considered to have met the conditions to substantiate the Outstanding Universal Value of the property as a whole, also meeting authenticity and integrity requirements. It was stated that some sites were not included as they were lacking the adequate conservation framework or they did not meet the necessary requirements of the International Charter.
This information is similar to that submitted in the nomination dossier and does not provide any further explanation as to how each of the component sites contributes towards the OUV of the property as a whole.
b) Buffer zone
The report mentions the process used to define the limits of the proposed components and their respective buffer zones. It includes maps to illustrate the boundaries of the core and buffer zones for the following components: Bridge of Atongo, Historic Centre of the City of San Juan del Rio, former convent of San Francisco in Tepeji del Rio and Bridge, the portion of the Camino Real between the Bridge of La Colmena and the former hacienda of La Cañada, the Historic Centre of the City of Lagos de Moreno and Bridge, the historic ensemble of the town of Ojuelos, Bridge of Ojuelos, Bridge of El Fraile, Bridge of San Rafael, Bridge La Quemada, portion of the Camino Real between Nazas and San Pedro del Gallo and the cave of Avalos.
These proposals will be considered under the item corresponding to minor boundary modification. No additional information was provided on the regulatory measures that will support the protection and management of these buffer zones or how they will be implemented.
c) Legislative protection of cultural routes and coordinated management framework
The State Party reports that the components of the property will benefit from two ongoing initiatives: the initiative of General Law on the Protection of Cultural Routes and the National Conference of Governors (CONAGO).
Regarding the legislation, an Internet link was included which indicates that in April 2009, the proposal to create a General Law on the Protection of Cultural Routes was submitted to the Commission of Culture for consideration. According to the information provided, the law was presented in August 2008, and will have the purpose of regulating the identification, preservation, conservation, restoration and research of the national system of cultural routes. It will also establish the process for gazetting routes and will create a Technical Council for Cultural Routes as an advisory body to the authorities It is believed that the approval of this legislation is still pending and no additional information was provided on the expected timeframe for its completion.
Regarding CONAGO, during its 37th Ordinary session held in November 2010, the creation of a Trust for the Camino Real de Tierra Adentro was approved and work schedules established for the formulation of a management and administration plan, as well as a plan for sustainable tourism development which would include three interpretation centres. No additional information was provided on expected timeframes for completion, or on the development of a management plan and funding sources for implementation.
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM
The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies consider that the information provided to justify the sites chosen needs to be completed to include how each contributes towards the Outstanding Universal Value. Information should also be provided on the proposed management strategy. They consider that although the component sites have some level of protection via existing legislation and regulatory frameworks, effective conservation and management of the overall route and its components will not be sufficiently ensured until ongoing initiatives have been finalized and implemented. They wish to underscore the importance of formulating a management plan and in defining overarching policies for conservation, protection and management for the route and also in identifying specific regulatory measures at the site level for the components that sustain the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, particularly as it relates to the management of the buffer zones. This will require significant levels of co-ordination and resources to sustain these efforts and thus a long-term commitment by all involved stakeholders.
Decision Adopted: 35 COM 7B.128
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-11/35.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 34 COM 8B.41, adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010),
3. Notes the information provided on the choice of component sites but considers that this has not yet defined how each of the sites contributes towards the property's Outstanding Universal Value;
4. Also notes the information provided regarding buffer zones for the components under Item 8 of the Agenda of the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee (Document WHC-11/35.COM/8B);
5. Further notes the information provided by the State Party and encourages it to establish a management strategy with the necessary legislative framework to effectively sustain the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;
6. Requests the State Party to develop a management plan for the property, including a public use component, based on an understanding of how the component sites contribute to Outstanding Universal Value; and to provide upon completion, three printed and electronic copies, for review by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;
7. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, 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 37th session in 2013.