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

Tyre

Lebanon
Factors affecting the property in 2008*
  • Housing
  • Illegal activities
  • Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:

    Insufficient maintenance

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Need for an international safeguarding campaign (issue resolved)
  • Construction of a tourist complex (land fill) (issue resolved)
  • Construction project of a large fish market (issue resolved)
  • Construction project of a coastal motorway (issue resolved)
  • Uncontrolled construction  (issue resolved)
  • Project to build a new tourist marina (issue resolved)
  • Road construction project (issue resolved)
  • Need for a Urbain Master Plan for the city
  • Lack of management mechanism (including legislation) 
  • Important and often uncontrolled urban development
  • Public works, tourism developments
  • Absence of a management and conservation plan
  • Insufficient maintenance
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2008

Total amount provided to the property: USD 19,173 from 1997 to 2001 for the International Safeguarding Campaign 

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2008
Requests approved: 4 (from 1986-2001)
Total amount approved : 29,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2008**

2004: Evaluation mission by the UNESCO Beirut Office; September 2006: UNESCO mission following the 2006 summer conflict 

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2008

At its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007), the World Heritage Committee examined the state of conservation report on the property by the State Party that provided information on the fact that many of the recommendations of the World Heritage Committee at its 30th session had not been implemented, notably due to the 2006 conflict in the country.

On 5 November 2007, the International Association for the Safeguarding of Tyre convened an international seminar in Paris, under the auspices of UNESCO and of the Permanent Delegation of Lebanon to UNESCO. Several experts attended the seminar which presented an update of the scientific research and of projects.

At the time of preparing this document, the report requested of the State Party by the World Heritage Committee had not been received. In addition, the reactive monitoring mission foreseen in Decision 31 COM 7B.62 could not take place due to the UN restrictions on missions to Lebanon. Therefore, no recent information on the state of conservation of the property is available. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2008
32 COM 7B.60
Tyr (Lebanon) (C 299)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 7B.52, and 31 COM 7B.62 adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006) and 31st (Christchurch, 2007) sessions respectively,

3. Regrets that the State Party has not submitted the report requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007), without which it is not possible to assess the progress of activities at the property;

4. Requests the State Party, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to develop a draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value, including the conditions of integrity and authenticity, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009;

5. Reiterates its request to the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to evaluate the progress and the impact of the projects in progress and envisaged;

6. Also requests the State Party to provide a detailed topographical map with geographic coordinates indicating the boundaries of the property, and if possible those of its buffer zone by 1 December 2008, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009;

7. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2009, a progress report on the implementation of its recommendations, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009.

Draft Decision: 32 COM 7B.60

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decisions 30 COM 7B.52, and 31 COM 7B.62 adopted at its 30th (Vilnius, 2006) and 31st (Christchurch, 2007) sessions respectively,

3. Regrets that the State Party has not submitted the report requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007), without which it is not possible to assess the progress of activities at the property;

4. Reiterates its request to the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to evaluate the progress and the impact of the projects in progress and envisaged ;

5. Requests the State Party, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to develop, prior to the arrival of the mission, a project of Statement of outstanding universal value, including the conditions of integrity and authenticity, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009 ;

6. Also requests the State Party to provide a detailed topographical map with geographic coordinates indicating the boundaries of the property, and if possible those of its buffer zone by 1 December 2008, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009 ;

7. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2009, a progress report on the implementation of its recommendations, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd session in 2009.

Report year: 2008
Lebanon
Date of Inscription: 1984
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (iii)(vi)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 32COM (2008)
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