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

Garamba National Park

Democratic Republic of the Congo
Factors affecting the property in 2012*
  • Civil unrest
  • Human resources
  • Illegal activities
  • Management activities
  • War
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) Armed conflict and political instability;

b) Poaching by a nationals and Sudanese;

c) unadapted management capabilities.

Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
  • Increased poaching;
  • Irregular presence of armed militia and settlers at the property.
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger

A draft was prepared during the 2010 reactive monitoring mission (https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/136/documents/) but indicators need to be quantified on this basis of the results of the main mammals censes.

Corrective Measures for the property

Adopted, See page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4082

UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2012

Total amount provided to the property: Conservation Programme for the DRC World Heritage properties (DRC Programme) financed by the United Nations Foundation (UNF), Italy and Belgium (2001-2005): approximately USD 400,000; the Rapid Response Facility (totaling USD 60,000) training of guards and more recently replacement of communication equipment. Within the framework of the Third Phase, 450 000 USD have been allocated by the Spanish Government for the site.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2012
Requests approved: 12 (from 1980-2000)
Total amount approved : 248,270 USD
Missions to the property until 2012**

2006: World Heritage Centre/IUCN monitoring mission; several UNESCO missions in the framework of the «DRC Programme». 2010: World Heritage Centre/IUCN monitoring mission.

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2012

On 2 February 2012, the State Party submitted a brief report on the state of conservation of the property. The report indicates that the presence of Ugandan rebels of the « Lord Resistance Army » (LRA) continue to perturb security, even though the number of attacks has diminished in comparison to previous years. The presence of the rebels complicates the management of the property, particularly as regards the anti-poaching measures, as well as the implementation of the corrective measures. Despite these difficulties, the following efforts have been achieved in implementing the corrective measures:

a) Take urgent measures at the highest level to halt the involvement of the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) in poaching activities

The report states that official action has been undertaken by the General Directorate of the Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation (ICCN) to resolve this issue. The report notes that the Chief of the General Headquarters of the FARDC has formally instructed the Commander of the military region in this respect, but indicates that a number of undisciplined soldiers continue to carry out poaching activities.

b) Ensure that the ICCN guard force is correctly equipped, in particular with adequate arms and ammunition

The State Party indicates that the guards for the site of Garamba are equipped with material without providing more detailed information. The report notes that the guards lack mapping equipment and ammunition and recall that this situation is a cause for concern, with important risks to the guards when on patrol. No new mapping equipment has been received since 2007, whereas the existing equipment is often of bad quality. Mixed patrols are organized with the FARDC for the surveillance of the insecure areas.

c) Undertake, if possible in cooperation with the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO), a disarmament campaign within the communities living around the property, whilst at the same time improve the security situation in the region

The State Party informed that the efforts of disarmament and improving security for the communities living around the Garamba National Park are carried out in collaboration with the MONUSCO, the site guards and elements of the FARDC. The report notes that the results of these actions are very satisfactory, but no quantitative data is provided on the number of arms seized and population disarmed. It should also be noted that in 2011 during patrols, the Park guards recuperated nine children who had been kidnapped by the LRA rebels.

d) Renew contacts with Sudan to strengthen transboundary cooperation with Lantoto National Park

The State Party indicated that this measure is one of its priorities, but is waiting for favourable conditions before renewing contacts with the Sudanese of the Lantoto National Park. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that a regional project covering South Sudan and the Bili-Uere Protected Area in the DRC is being prepared by the Wildlife Conservation Society, could be an opportunity to improve and relaunch collaboration between the two institutions.

e) Ensure that a team of at least 200 operational guards are available following the rapid pensioning off of elderly guards and replacement of guards not fulfilling the required qualifications

The State Party informed that 140 guards were operational, and that it has planned for the recruitment of 50 new units for 2012. 30 guards are awaiting the finalization of their briefing file for retirement.

f) Gradually extend the surveillance area to include the total area of the Park and at least 20% of the hunting grounds, by 2015

The State Party indicated that the surveillance area of Garamba National Park and the hunting grounds has been extended due to the regular aerial patrols of these areas, as well as the opening up of routes within the Park. In 2011, for the first time in ten years a few patrols have crossed Garamba and 80 km of surveillance routes have been opened up in the northern part. Two mixed patrols reached the boundary with south Sudan, a zone that had not been monitored by ground patrols since the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. This extension to the surveillance of the property will have a positive impact in reducing poaching acticities but unfortunately, quantitative information is not mentioned in the report. The report also makes no mention of quantitative information on the coverage of the property and the hunting grounds, nor reduction in poaching.

g) Establish a conservation strategy for the hunting grounds (DC) so they may fully play their role of buffer zone, and in view of their importance for the conservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property

The State Party indicated problems of security in the hunting grounds linked to the presence of the LRA. Patrols have been organized to the north of the hunting grounds of Gangala na Bodio and to the west of the Mondo Misa hunting grounds, but the hunting grounds of the Azande remain inaccessible due to insecurity. No information is provided on the establishment of a conservation strategy in the hunting grounds.

h) Strengthen community conservation activities to improve relations with the local communities

The State Party informed that a school has been built in Nagero and that a hospital is under construction, with support of the Spanish Government. Environmental education activities are provided to schoolchildren as well as visits to the Park. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note that the State Party has accomplished important work with the communities as they have obtained the withdrawal from the gold mines in the chimpanzee area. They have also noted that thanks to conservation activities and community conservation programmes, the populations have not returned to the Park.

i) Finalize and approve the Management Plan for the property and ensure the means for its implementation

The report makes no mention of the Management Plan for the property. The 2011 report made mention that the draft Management Plan (2011-2015) had been finalized and submitted to the Directorate General of ICCN for comment and that its approval was foreseen towards the end of 2012.

j) Wildlife status

The report notes that in the zones covered by the Park guards, no trace of White Rhinoceros had been found, but that the Azande hunting ground and the northern part of the Park where favourable ecosystems existed for rhinoceros, were currently inaccessible due to problems of security.

The report makes no mention of the aerial inventory of wildlife that was originally foreseen in 2010, but which had been delayed several times due to financial constraints and technical difficulties. This inventory is now foreseen for April 2012. The World Heritage Centre received a report from the NGO African Parks Garamba concerning an ongoing ecological monitoring study on elephants with support from Spain through UNESCO. Five elephants have been equipped with electronic collars and their position is followed by satellite. The results demonstrate the importance of the hunting grounds of Azande and Gangala na Bodio, where the elephants spend a part of the dry season and confirm their importance for the integrity of the property.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note the importance of confirming the status of the Northern White Rhinoceros that justified the Outstanding Universal Value of the property. They note that the Specialist Group for the African Rhinoceros of the the IUCN Species Survival Commission consider that the Northern White Rhinoceros is probably extinct in the DRC, and they no longer consider the DRC as a State that is part of the distribution for the sub-species. They note that at the global level only 4 individuals remain, in Kenya, that are still capable of contributing to the reproduction of the sub-species. The World Heritage Centre and IUCN confirm the importance to carry out urgently an aerial survey of the populations of large mammals. This type of inventory will provide not only crucial data for the finalization of indicators for the Desired state of conservation, for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger, but also demonstrate whether the populations of wildlife are stabilized.

The report mentions also the rehabilitation by the MONUSCO of the route between Aru (Ugandan frontier) and Dungu, crossing the Gangala na Bodio hunting grounds and passing 4 km distance from the central station of the Nagero Park. This rehabilitation will benefit the population and also open up the property, facilitating Park logistics, but also risk encouraging the illicit traffic of bush meat and ivory. In order to combat this illicit trade, the report notes the need to install control points on the road. The report notes that the timetable for the implementation of the corrective measures mainly depends upon a significant improvement of the security situation in the region. 

Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2012

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note the important progress made by the State Party in the implementation of certain corrective measures, but also note that the persistence of pockets of armed groups continue to render difficult the management of the property, especially the anti-poaching efforts. They consider that a more detailed and quantitative report should be provided to assess the reported progress. They recall the commitments undertaken by the Congolese Government in the Kinshasa Declaration of January 2011, in respect of strengthening the operational capacities of the ICCN, notably by ensuring the availability of mapping equipment for surveillance activities.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN recall that the urgent establishment of an inventory of large animal populations is crucial in order to quantify the impact of the corrective measures on the rehabilitation of the Outstanding Universal Value. This data is also essential for the finalization of the indicators for the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The World Heritage Centre and IUCN note the important funding mobilized for the conservation of the property, notably by the European Union and Spain, that demonstrate the importance that the international community accord to this site, and which appear to be achieving satisfactory results. However, they consider that insecurity in certain hunting grounds due to the persistent presence of armed groups continues to disrupt the implementation of the corrective measures. They therefore recommend the maintenance of the reinforced monitoring mechanism for this property.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2012
36 COM 7A.36
World Heritage properties of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7A.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 35 COM 7A.35, adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

3. Expresses its concern that signature of the January 2011 Kinshasa Declaration has not yet resulted in a concerted action between the different Ministries, the army and different technical agencies which is necessary to resolve some urgent conservation issues in the sites and create the conditions for their rehabilitation;

4. Notes with concern the consistent reports from different properties about continued involvement of elements of the Congolese Army in illegal exploitation of the natural resources;

5. Considers that the recent permit which has been granted to the international oil and gas company SOCO to start oil exploration activities in Virunga National Park is not in conformity with commitments made by the State Party in the Kinshasa Declaration;

6. Urges the State Party to ensure a full implementation of the commitments made in the Kinshasa Declaration and ensure the implementation of the Strategic Action Plan and in particular to urgently set up the inter-ministerial committee to ensure that specific activities of the action plan which need political decisions or the cooperation and commitment from other Ministries and state entities are implemented;

7. Welcomes the continued support from donor countries for the conservation of the five properties of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the on-going efforts to set up a sustainable financing mechanism;

8. Requests the State Party in close cooperation with the World Heritage Centre and IUCN to organize an evaluation of the implementation of the action plan, identify obstacles to its implementation and ways to address these with the concerned Ministries and present a report on this evaluation to the World Heritage Centre, for consideration by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013.

36 COM 7A.6
Garamba National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo) (N 136)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7A,

2. Recalling Decision 35 COM 7A.6, adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

3. Notes with satisfaction the progress in the implementation of the corrective measures but requests the State Party to provide a more detailed and quantitative report to enable the Committee to assess the reported progress;

4. Regrets that the persistence of pockets of armed groups continue to render difficult the  management of the property and especially the anti-poaching efforts, and that the lack of mapping equipment continues to cause important risks to the guards when on patrol;

5. Recalls the commitments undertaken by the Congolese Government in the Kinshasa Declaration of January 2011, notably to reinforce the operational capacities of the ICCN, and also requests that mapping equipment for surveillance activities be made available;

6. Reiterates its concern regarding the probable extinction of the Northern White Rhinoceros in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and considers that, unless there is proof that the sub-species still survives in the DRC, the State Party should consider other options for the conservation of the animals remaining in Kenya in consultation with the African Rhino Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission, with a view to the possible future reintroduction of the sub-species within the property, crossed or not with the southern white rhinoceros;

7. Further requests the State Party to continue its efforts to implement the corrective measures to rehabilitate the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

8. Strongly urges the State Party to urgently carry out a survey of the large mammal populations to quantify the impact of the corrective measures on the rehabilitation of the Outstanding Universal Value and also requests the State Party, based on the results and in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to finalize the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger and to update the required timetable, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013;

9. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2013, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the property, including an update of progress accomplished in the implementation of the corrective measures, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013;

10. Decides to continue the application of the reinforced monitoring mechanism for the property;

11. Also decides to retain Garamba National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo) on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 

36 COM 8C.2
Establishment of the World Heritage List in Danger (Maintained Properties)

The World Heritage Committee,

1.   Following the examination of the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-12/36.COM/7A and WHC-12/36.COM/7A.Add),

2.   Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

    • Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 36 COM 7A.25)
    • Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Decision 36 COM 7A.26)
    • Belize, Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Decision 36 COM 7A.15)
    • Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.1)
    • Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 36 COM 7A.33)
    • Colombia, Los Katíos National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.16)
    • Côte d'Ivoire, Comoé National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.2)
    • Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 36 COM 7A.3)
    • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.4)
    • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.5)
    • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.6)
    • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.7)
    • Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 36 COM 7A.8)
    • Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 36 COM 7A.20)
    • Ethiopia, Simien National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.9)
    • Georgia, Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery (Decision 36 COM 7A.30)
    • Georgia, Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Decision 36 COM 7A.31)
    • Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 36 COM 7A.17)
    • Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 36 COM 7A.13)
    • Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 36 COM 7A.21)
    • Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 36 COM 7A.22)
    • Islamic Republic of Iran, Bam and its Cultural Landscape (Decision 36 COM 7A.27)
    • Jerusalem, Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (Decision 36 COM 7A.23.I)
    • Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 36 COM 7A.10)
    • Niger, Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 36 COM 7A.11)
    • Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 36 COM 7A.34)
    • Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.12)
    • Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 36 COM 7A.32)
    • United Rep. of Tanzania, Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo Mnara (Decision 36 COM 7A.19)
    • Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 36 COM 7A.18)
    • United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 36 COM 7A.14)
    • Venezuela, Coro and its Port (Decision 36 COM 7A.35)
    • Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 36 COM 7A.24)
36 COM 8E
Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value

The World Heritage Committee,

1.   Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/8E,

2.   Congratulates States Parties for the excellent work accomplished in the elaboration of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in their territories;

3.   Adopts the retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-12/36.COM/8E, for the following World Heritage properties:

    • Australia:  Great Barrier Reef; Lord Howe Island Group; Gondwana Rainforests of Australia; Wet Tropics of Queensland; Fraser Island; Australian Fossil Mammal Sites (Riversleigh / Naracoorte); Heard and McDonald Islands; Macquarie Island; Purnululu National Park;
    • Bangladesh: Historic Mosque City of Bagerhat;
    • Cambodia: Angkor;
    • China: Mount Taishan; The Great Wall; Imperial Palaces of the Ming and Qing Dynasties in Beijing and Shenyang; Mogao Caves; Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian; Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area; Temple and Cemetery of Confucius, and the Kong Family Mansion in Qufu; Ancient Building Complex in the Wudang Mountains; Historic Ensemble of the Potala Palace, Lhasa; Lushan National Park; Mount Emei Scenic Area, including Leshan Giant Buddha Scenic Area; Old Town of Lijiang; Temple of Heaven: an Imperial Sacrificial Altar in Beijing; Mount Wuyi; Dazu Rock Carvings; Mount Qincheng and the Dujiangyan Irrigation System; Capital Cities and Tombs of the Ancient Koguryo Kingdom; Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries – Wolong, Mt Siguniang and Jiajin Mountains;
    • Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea: Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve;
    • Democratic People’s Republic of Korea: Complex of Koguryo Tombs;
    • Democratic Republic of the Congo: Virunga National Park; Garamba National Park; Kahuzi-Biega National Park; Salonga National Park;
    • Egypt: Wadi Al-Hitan (Whale Valley);
    • Estonia: Historic Centre (Old Town) of Tallinn;
    • Ethiopia: Rock-Hewn Churches, Lalibela; Lower Valley of the Awash; Lower Valley of the Omo; Harar Jugol, the Fortified Historic Town;
    • Gambia: Kunta Kinteh Island and Related Sites;
    • Gambia and Senegal: Stone Circles of Senegambia;
    • Ghana: Forts and Castles, Volta, Greater Accra, Central and Western Regions; Asante Traditional Buildings;
    • India: Taj Mahal; Keoladeo National Park; Sundarbans National Park; Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers National Parks;
    • Indonesia: Borobudur Temple Compounds; Prambanan Temple Compounds;
    • Islamic Republic of Iran: Bam and its Cultural Landscape;
    • Kazakhstan: Mausoleum of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi; Petroglyphs within the Archaeological Landscape of Tamgaly;
    • Madagascar: Tsingy de Bemaraha Strict Nature Reserve; Royal Hill of Ambohimanga;
    • Malaysia: Gunung Mulu National Park;
    • Mali: Timbuktu; Cliff of Bandiagara (Land of the Dogons); Tomb of Askia;
    • Mongolia: Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape;
    • Nepal: Sagarmatha National Park; Kathmandu Valley; Chitwan National Park; Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha;
    • New Zealand: Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand; New Zealand Sub-Antarctic Islands;
    • Nigeria: Osun-Osogbo Sacred Grove;
    • Pakistan: Archaeological Ruins at Moenjodaro;
    • Philippines: Baroque Churches of the Philippines; Puerto-Princesa Subterranean River National Park;
    • Republic of Korea: Seokguram Grotto and Bulguksa Temple; Haeinsa Temple Janggyeong Pangeon, the Depositories for the Tripitaka Koreana Woodblocks; Jongmyo Shrine; Changdeokgung Palace Complex; Hwaseong Fortress; Gyeongju Historic Areas; Gochang, Hwasun and Ganghwa Dolmen Sites;
    • Solomon Islands: East Rennell;
    • Thailand: Historic City of Ayutthaya;
    • Turkmenistan: State Historical and Cultural Park “Ancient Merv”; Kunya-Urgench;
    • United Republic of Tanzania: Serengeti National Park; Kondoa Rock-Art Sites; 
    • Uzbekistan: Historic Centre of Bukhara; Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz; Samarkand – Crossroad of Cultures;
    • Viet Nam: Ha Long Bay; My Son Sanctuary; Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park;
    • Zambia and Zimbabwe: Mosi-oa-Tunya / Victoria Falls;
    • Zimbabwe: Great Zimbabwe National Monument; Khami Ruins National Monument; Matobo Hills;

4.   Decides that retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in Danger will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies in priority;

5.   Further decides that, considering the high number of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value to be examined, the order in which they will be reviewed by the Advisory Bodies will follow the Second Cycle of Periodic Reporting, namely:

    • World Heritage properties in the Arab States;
    • World Heritage properties in Africa;
    • World Heritage properties in Asia and the Pacific;
    • World Heritage properties in Latin America and the Caribbean;
    • World Heritage properties in Europe and North America. 
Draft Decision: 36 COM 7A.6

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7A,

2. Recalling Decision 35 COM 7A.6, adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

3. Notes with satisfaction the progress in the implementation of the corrective measures but requests the State Party to provide a more detailed and quantitative report to enable the Committee to assess the reported progress;

4. Regrets that the persistence of pockets of armed groups continue to render difficult the management of the property and especially the anti-poaching efforts, and that the lack of mapping equipment continues to cause important risks to the guards when on patrol;

5. Recalls the commitments undertaken by the Congolese Government in the Kinshasa Declaration of January 2011, notably to reinforce the operational capacities of the ICCN, and also requests that mapping equipment for surveillance activities be made available;

6. Reiterates its concern regarding the probable extinction of the Northern White Rhinoceros in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and considers that, unless there is proof that the sub-species still survives in the DRC, the State Party should consider other options for the conservation of the animals remaining in Kenya in consultation with the African Rhino Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission, with a view to the possible future reintroduction of the sub-species within the property, crossed or not with the southern white rhinoceros;

7. Further requests the State Party to continue its efforts to implement the corrective measures to rehabilitate the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

8. Strongly urges the State Party to urgently carry out a survey of the large mammal populations to quantify the impact of the corrective measures on the rehabilitation of the Outstanding Universal Value and also requests the State Party, based on the results and in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to finalize the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger and to update the required timetable, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013;

9. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2013, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the property, including an update of progress accomplished in the implementation of the corrective measures, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013;

10. Decides to continue the application of the reinforced monitoring mechanism for the property;

11. Also decides to retain Garamba National Park (Democratic Republic of the Congo) on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 

Report year: 2012
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Date of Inscription: 1980
Category: Natural
Criteria: (vii)(x)
Danger List (dates): 1984-1992, 1996-present
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 36COM (2012)
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