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

Tipasa

Algeria
Factors affecting the property in 2009*
  • Deliberate destruction of heritage
  • Erosion and siltation/ deposition
  • Housing
  • Human resources
  • Illegal activities
  • Impacts of tourism / visitor / recreation
  • Management activities
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Marine transport infrastructure
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) Natural degradation caused by littoral erosion, marine salt and vegetation covering part of the inscribed sectors;

b) Deterioration of the remains due to vandalism, theft and uncontrolled visitation causing accumulation of rubbish;

c) Urbanization on the outskirts of the property where, in the absence of a defined buffer zone, illegal construction provokes land disputes;

d) Lack of capacities for site conservation, unsuitable restoration techniques, and poor conservation conditions for the archaeological remains;

e) Proposed port development.

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2009

Total amount provided to the property: USD 9,564 from the Italian Funds-in-Trust.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2009
Requests approved: 6 (from 1989-2001)
Total amount approved : 75,900 USD
Missions to the property until 2009**

2002: World Heritage Centre and experts missions; March 2006: joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2009

At its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008), the World Heritage Committee requested the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2009, a report on the progress made with the completion and implementation of the “Protection and valorization plan” (PPMVSA), a map clearly displaying the delimitation of all components of this serial property, and its buffer zone, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009; and (as soon as possible and prior to carrying out the work), the detailed design of the proposed port development showing its impact on the property. The State Party report was received on 30 January 2009.

 

a) PPMVSA

The report notes that the first phase of the Plan de Protection et de Mise en valeur des sites archéologiques de Tipasa et de sa zone de protection (PPMVSA): Méthodologie d’approche et contenu de l’étude, expected in November 2008 has been delayed. The State Party submitted the first part of Phase I of the PPMVSA at the end of January 2009; this report presents a series of documents which delineate and illustrate the limits of the zone of protection for the five sectors of the property. This comprehensive visual analysis of the perimeter conditions of the site is undoubtedly a very valuable planning tool but it is worth noting that none of the work is explicitly linked to the delimitation of the World Heritage property or its buffer zone.

The State Party report presents a revised schedule which suggests the PPMVSA will be completed by the end of 2009. However work on phase I is behind completion dates established in the schedule submitted, and delay beyond the end of 2009 may be expected.

b) Buffer zone

The State Party refers to the PPMVSA report submitted above as containing the requested information concerning the boundaries of the inscribed property and its buffer zone. The State Party submitted to the World Heritage Centre the map requested within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory as well as a proposal for a buffer zone, which will be presented to the World Heritage Committee in document WHC-09/33.COM/8B, related to “minor modifications of the limits of the property”.

c) Proposed port

Concerning the request to present urgently all details of the design of the proposed port development showing its impact on the property, the State Party report mentions that the project is being carried out in close coordination between the Public Works Directorate, the Tipasa Wilaya and the various departments in charge of cultural heritage at national and local levels. The report includes a power point with an outline of the project and simulations. However, the slides are not accompanied by a project description, detailed plans, or an assessment of its impact on the property.  

 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2009
33 COM 7B.51
Tipasa (Algeria) (C 193)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-09/33.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 32 COM 7B.56, adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008),

3. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a report on progress made with the completion and implementation of the "Protection and Valorisation Plan for the archaeological site of Tipasa and its zone of protection";

4. Reiterates its request to the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, prior to carrying out the work, the detailed design and plans of the proposed port development, together with an assessment of its impact on the property;

5. Also requests that the State Party submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a progress report on the implementation of the above recommendations, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011.

33 COM 8B.41
Cultural properties - Examination of minor boundary modifications - Tipasa (Algeria)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Documents WHC-09/33.COM/8B and WHC-09/33.COM/INF.8B1.Add,

2. Refers the examination of the proposed buffer zones for Tipasa, Algeria, back to the State Party to allow it to:

a) Revise the boundary of the proposed buffer zone to include the port area;

b) Provide details of the status of the buffer zone and what protection it will afford the inscribed property as well as what protection will be given to archaeological remains associated with those in the property;

c) Clarify whether the Kbor er Roumia will be provided with a buffer zone.

33 COM 8D
Clarifications of property boundaries and sizes by States Parties in response to the Retrospective Inventory

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-09/33.COM/8D,

2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 11A.2, 31 COM 11A.2 and 32 COM 8D, adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006), 31st (Christchurch, 2007) and 32nd (Quebec City, 2008) sessions respectively,

3. Recalls that, as decided at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007) by Decision 31 COM 11A.2, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies will not be able to examine proposals for minor or significant modifications to boundaries of World Heritage properties whenever the delimitation of such properties as inscribed is unclear;

4. Congratulates States Parties in the Europe Region and the State Party of Algeria on the excellent work accomplished in the clarification of the delimitation of their World Heritage properties and thanks them for their efforts to improve the credibility of the World Heritage List;

5. Takes note of the clarifications of property boundaries and sizes provided by the following States Parties in the European and Arab Regions in response to the Retrospective Inventory, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-09/33.COM/8D:

- Algeria: Tipasa;

- Austria: Semmering Railway;

- Belarus/Poland: Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Białowieża Forest;

- Bulgaria: Madara Rider; Rila Monastery;

- Croatia: Old City of Dubrovnik; Historic City of Trogir;

- Czech Republic: Holašovice Historical Village Reservation;

- France: Chartres Cathedral;

- Germany: St. Mary's Cathedral and St. Michael's Church in Hildesheim; Pilgrimage Church of Wies; Hanseatic City of Lübeck;

- Greece: Archaeological Site of Delphi; Acropolis, Athens; Meteora; Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus; Archaeological Site of Olympia; Monastery of Daphni, Hosios Loukas and Nea Moni of Chios;

- Holy See/Italy: Historic Centre of Rome, the Properties of the Holy See in that City enjoying Extraterritorial Rights and San Paolo Fuori le Mura;

- Italy: Castel del Monte; 18th-Century Royal Palace at Caserta with the Park, the Aqueduct of Vanvitelli and the San Leucio Complex; Cathedral, Torre Civica and Piazza Grande, Modena; Archaeological Areas of Pompei, Herculaneum and Torre Annunziata; Cilento and Vallo di Diano National Park with the Archaeological sites of Paestum and Velia, and the Certosa di Padula;

- Montenegro: Durmitor National Park;

- Turkey: Great Mosque and Hospital of Divriği; Hattusha: the Hittite Capital; Nemrut Dağ; Xanthos-Letoon; Archaeological Site of Troy.

6. Requests the European and Arab States Parties which have not yet answered the questions raised in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory to provide all requested clarifications and documentation as soon as possible and by 1 December 2009 at the latest.

Draft Decision: 33 COM 7B.51

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-09/33.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 32 COM 7B.56, adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City, 2008),

3. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a report on progress made with the completion and implementation of the “Protection and Valorisation Plan for the archaeological site of Tipasa and its zone of protection”;

4. Reiterates its request to the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, prior to carrying out the work, the detailed design and plans of the proposed port development, together with an assessment of its impact on the property;

5. Also requests that the State Party submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2011, a progress report on the implementation of the above recommendations, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011.

Report year: 2009
Algeria
Date of Inscription: 1982
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)(iv)
Danger List (dates): 2002-2006
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 33COM (2009)
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