State of Conservation
23
Reports
23
Properties concerned
21
States Parties with SOC reports
Property Category:Culturalclose
Date Start:
2016close
Date end:2016close
| States Parties: |
 Poland
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Slow process of consultation with local communities. |
| States Parties: |
 Afghanistan
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7A.Add |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Risk of imminent collapse of the Giant Buddha niches; Irreversible deterioration of the mural paintings |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| States Parties: |
 Lithuania Russian Federation
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure Marine transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Sudan
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 India
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Vulnerabilities of certain individual structures within the forts requiring short-term conservation actions |
| States Parties: |
 Mexico
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 China
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Peru
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
Russian Federation
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Nepal
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Air transport infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
Russian Federation
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Marine transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Kenya
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Marine transport infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Deterioration of dwellings |
| States Parties: |
 Egypt
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Haiti
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Montenegro
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Ground transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: | Jerusalem (Site proposed by Jordan) |
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7A.Add.2 |
| Threats*: | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Natural risk factors; Deterioration of monuments |
| Danger List: | Yes |
| States Parties: |
 Sri Lanka
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Marine transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Türkiye
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure |
| Other Threats: | Need to improve the monitoring system by specifying which organization is responsible for monitoring each indicator and include seismic monitoring |
| States Parties: |
 Costa Rica
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B |
| Threats*: | Air transport infrastructure |
| States Parties: |
 Iran (Islamic Republic of)
|
| Year: | 2016 |
| Document Source: | WHC/16/40.COM/7B.Add |
| Threats*: | Effects arising from use of transportation infrastructure Ground transport infrastructure |
* :
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.
