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

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x

State of Conservation

1825
Reports
317
Properties concerned
113
States Parties with SOC reports
Property Category:Culturalclose
Threats* : Management systems/ management planclose
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2011
Document Source: WHC-11/35.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Impact of the new structure of the Maya Devi Temple (constructed in 2002) on the archaeological remains, as well as on the visual integrity.
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2009
Document Source: WHC-09/33.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: b) Impact on the archaeological remains, as well as on the visual integrity of the property by the Maya Devi Temple constructed in 2002
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2008
Document Source: WHC-08/32.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Impact of the new structure of the Maya Devi Temple (constructed in 2002) on the archaeological remains, as well as on the visual integrity.
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2006
Document Source: WHC-06/30.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Impact on the archaeological remains as well as on the visual integrity of the site by the newly constructed Maya Devi Temple in 2002.
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2005
Document Source: WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Impact of new structure of the Maya Devi Temple in the core area
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2004
Document Source: WHC-04/28.COM/15B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2003
Document Source: WHC.03/27.COM/7B,WHC.03/27.COM/7B.Corr
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Extremely harsh natural environment; Improve the drainage for the Temple
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2002
Document Source: WHC-02/CONF.201/11Rev,WHC-02/CONF.202/17
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Extremely harsh natural environment; Improve the drainage for the Temple
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2001
Document Source: WHC-01/CONF.208/10,WHC-2001/CONF.205/5
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Extremely harsh natural environment; Improve the drainage for the Temple
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 2000
Document Source: WHC-2000/CONF.202/5,WHC-2000/CONF.204/10
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Extremely harsh natural environment
States Parties: Nepal
Year: 1999
Document Source: WHC-99/CONF.204/5,WHC-99/CONF.209/14
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Extremely harsh natural environment
States Parties: Algeria
Year: 2008
Document Source: WHC-08/32.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Degradation of the environment
States Parties: Algeria
Year: 2006
Document Source: WHC-06/30.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Deterioration of the environment
States Parties: Andorra
Year: 2012
Document Source: WHC-12/36.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: Andorra
Year: 2010
Document Source: WHC-10/34.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: Andorra
Year: 2008
Document Source: WHC-08/32.COM/7B.Add
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: Andorra
Year: 2006
Document Source: WHC-06/30.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: Andorra
Year: 2005
Document Source: WHC-05/29.COM/7B.Rev
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: India
Year: 2014
Document Source: WHC-14/38.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
States Parties: India
Year: 2012
Document Source: WHC-12/36.COM/7B
Threats*: Management systems/ management plan
Other Threats: Loss of character of the cultural landscape directly associated with the property and its outstanding universal value

* : 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