Rock-Hewn Churches, Lalibela

a) No boundaries for the property nor for the buffer zone ;

b) Impact of the four recently constructed temporary shelters ;

c) Absence of a management plan for the property;

d) Insufficient urban and architectural regulations;

e) Urban development around the property;

f) Impact of rainwater and humidity ;

g) Geological and architectural characteristics of the churches.

Total amount provided to the property : USD 300,000 for the « Conservation Action Plan for Lalibela » (Norwegian Funds-in-Trust).

In accordance with earlier missions, the shelter project and the conditions for its implementation have been modified by the Authority for Cultural Heritage Research and Conservation (ARCCH), the State Party supervising body. The revised project was developed following the main recommendations made by the World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS / ICCROM reactive monitoring mission, and Decision 30 COM 7B.40 of the World Heritage Committee.

Work began in February 2007 and should have been completed just after the joint mission in April 2008. The temporary shelters have a rainwater evacuation system concentrated at one main point per shelter.

The present situation is as follows :

a) Works on the shelters were carried out respecting the integrity of the property ; the works caused no notable damage to the environment ; the microclimatic effects of the shelters on the monuments should however be carefully monitored. The evacuation of rainwater remains problematic and requires monitoring during the rainy season and, if necessary, modification;

b) The last shelter constructed over Biet Aba Libanos had been advised against by earlier missions due to a risk of landslides on the hill where the church is carved, which could potentially damage the church. Moreover, this church already has large cracks due to landslides that have occurred over time ;

c) The visual result of the shelters, although minimized in comparison to the original project, remains impressive, but is of a reversible nature and may be dismantled once a definite solution is found to waterproof the churches ;

d) Following this project, sustainable conservation and management solutions for the protection should be found without employing external physical means, and a regular monitoring on the effects of the shelters on the churches ;

e) The State Party has planned to carry out monthly monitoring of the shelters during the first year following the end of the works and requested the construction company to provide a maintenance and dismantlement plan of these shelters ;

f) Among those churches not protected by a shelter, Biet Gabriel Rufael requires restoration work; the World Heritage Centre is currently preparing a complete decay analysis ;

g) Different factors – pose a threat to the environment immediately surrounding the property, with no clearly defined buffer zone at present :

(i) Public and private constructions, and tourism infrastructures;

(ii) Potential widening and modification to roads and paths;

(iii) Urban development linked to the construction of housing units around the property;

(iv) Lack of urban and architectural regulations protecting the integrity of the property.

With regard to management, the present situation highlights the following issues :

a) No integrated management plan for the property ;

b) Need for participation by local communities concerning the property and its management plan.