Parthian Fortresses of Nisa
Factors affecting the property in 2010*
- High impact research / monitoring activities
- Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
a) Lack of interpretation and visitor management plan.
b) Archaeological excavations without conservation.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2010
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2010**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2010
On 28 January 2010 a report on the state of conservation of the Parthian Fortresses of Nisa was submitted by the State Party. The report consists of an updated version of the Management Plan and of a Statement of Outstanding Universal Value. This is the last of the three annual reports on the implementation of the Management Plan, that were requested by the Committee in its Decision 31 COM 8B.30 at the time of inscription.
With respect to the implementation of the Management Plan, progress made includes the completion of drainage works within the site, notably at the by-pass corridors of the Round Hall. As for the Round Hall itself, drainage works are still ongoing and should be completed in 2010. A drainage plan for the entire site was also prepared in 2009.
A new hall on Nisa has been arranged within the National Museum of Applied Arts of Turkmenistan, displaying objects found during archaeological excavations. At the same time, the ceiling of the existing site Museum has been repaired while a new storeroom has been created. A new administrative building appears to have been constructed at the site, according to the State Party report. This suggests that the State Party has abandoned the idea of constructing a new site museum, as indicated in its report of 2009. This, however, should be clarified with the State Party. With regard to visitors’ management and interpretation, signage and promotional materials were developed in 2009 along “well defined excursion routes”, and catering facilities set up within the site.
The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies welcome the progress made in implementing conservation activities at the site. They note, at the same time, that the document submitted is still an outline of a Management Plan, in that it consists mainly of a compilation of activities, at different stages of implementation, complemented by administrative and financial information on the managing authority. The timeframe for the implementation of these activities, moreover, does not go beyond 2010. What seems to be missing is an explicit vision articulated through specific conservation objectives – and a sufficiently long timeframe - which would address identified factors affecting the property and be aimed to maintain its Outstanding Universal Value.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2010
34 COM 7B.73
Parthian Fortresses of Nisa (Turkmenistan) (C 1242)
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.83 adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),
3. Acknowledges the information provided by the State Party on the implementation of the Management Plan including on interpretation and visitor management and welcomes the efforts made to improve conservation at the property;
4. Requests the State Party to provide to the World Heritage Centre clarification on:
a) Whether or not a new site museum is envisaged and, in the affirmative, to provide details on its location and design,
b) Details of the location and design of the new administrative building;
5. Also requests the State Party to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, a more comprehensive Management Plan including an explicit vision for the future of the World Heritage property articulated through specific conservation objectives - and a sufficiently long timeframe - which would address identified factors affecting the property and aiming at maintaining its Outstanding Universal Value;
6. Further requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on progress on the development of the above-mentioned management plan, on the issues detailed in Paragraph 4 above, as well as on the implementation of activities contained in the outline management plan submitted in 2010.
Draft Decision: 34 COM 7B.73
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.83 adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),
3. Acknowledges the information provided by the State Party on the implementation of the Management Plan including on interpretation and visitor management and welcomes the efforts made to improve conservation at the property;
4. Requests the State Party to provide to the World Heritage Centre clarification on:
a) Whether or not a new site Museum is envisaged and, in the affirmative, to provide details on its location and design,
b) Details of the siting and design of the new administrative building;
5. Also requests the State Party to develop, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, a more comprehensive Management Plan including an explicit vision for the future of the World Heritage property articulated through specific conservation objectives – and a sufficiently long timeframe - which would address identified factors affecting the property and aiming at maintaining its Outstanding Universal Value;
6. Further requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed on progress on the development of the above-mentioned management plan, on the issues detailed in paragraph 4 above, as well as on the implementation of activities contained in the outline management plan submitted in 2010.
TurkmenistanExports
* :
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.
