6 COM IX.26
Guidelines for the inscription of cultural and natural properties on the list of World Heritage in Danger
In introducing the draft guidelines which had been prepared jointly by IUCN and ICOMOS, the representative of IUCN drew attention to the following three objectives of the List of World Heritagein Danger:
a) to support national efforts towards safeguarding the integrity of a property;
b) to demonstrate to world opinion the reality of the danger threatening a property;
c) to contribute to the effectiveness of international fund-raising campaigns by identifying the property for which the public is being asked to contribute.
He stated that the list was considered as being a short list, ...
6 COM IX.27
Guidelines for the inscription of cultural and natural properties on the list of World Heritage in Danger
During the discussion that ensued on the draft criteria and procedure for the inscription of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger, several amendments were suggested to the text in paragraph 5.5 of the IUCN/ICOMOS document which was proposed for insertion in the "Operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention". These amendments related to the difficulty of inscribing properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger when major operations were not required to protect the property and when the State concerned did not require assistance under the ...
The World Heritage Committee,
Taking note of the proposal by the Belgian Delegation (presented in Figure 1 of document WHC-02/CONF.202/15) for the preparation of a compilation of World Heritage Basic Texts like the Basic Texts of UNESCO and of the positive comments on this proposal received from States Parties in responses to Circular Letter CL/WHC.12/02 concerning the revision of the Rules of Procedure;
Requests the World Heritage Centre, to prepare an outline and publication plan (including budget) for a compilation of World Heritage Basic Texts in English and French (to include the ...
6 EXT.COM 5.1
Revision Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Thanking the Drafting Group and all other experts, representatives of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention, the Advisory Bodies and the World Heritage Centre for work accomplished to date on the revision of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention;
2. Taking note of the Report of the March 2002 Drafting Group on the Revision of the Operational Guidelines presented as document WHC-03/6 EXT.COM/INF.5A;
3. Considering that the 3rd Draft Revised Operational Guidelines presented in document WHC-03/6 ...
The World Heritage Committee,
Takes note of the list of all nominations received by the World Heritage Centre between 28 January 2002 and 1 February 2003 as presented in document WHC-03/6 EXT.COM/7 Rev;
Decides that the 32 new nominations determined by the World Heritage Centre to be complete by 1 February 2003 and four additional nominations for which the Centre had asked for guidance from the Committee be transmitted to the Advisory Bodies for evaluation.
Requests the World Heritage Centre to assist States Parties who have submitted incomplete nominations to make them complete for ...
13. At its seventh session, the Bureau had expressed the wish that the Operational Guidelines (document WHC/2 Revised) be updated to incorporate the decisions taken by the Committee at its fifth and sixth sessions and the recommendations formulated by the Bureau at Its seventh session. The Secretariat presented the updated version of the Operational Guidelines (revised as of November 1983) and indicated to the Committee where changes and revisions had been made. The Committee took note of the updated version of the Guidelines and in addition accepted the ICOMOS recommendations concerning ...
21. The Rapporteur, Mr. Chabason, brought up the question of mixed cultural/natural properties and particularly of rural landscapes, which meet criterion (iii) for natural sites as "exceptional combinations of natural and cultural elements". Mr. Chabason described three types of problems connected with such properties. The first was the question of identification of exceptionally harmonious, beautiful, man-made landscapes as epitomised by the terraced rice-fields of S.E. Asia, the terraced fields of the Mediterranean Basin or by certain vineyard areas in Europe. In this respect, criterion ...
9 COM IX.25-28
Elaboration of Guidelines for the Identification and Nomination of Mixed Properties or Rural Landscapes
25. The representative of IUCN recalled that this question had been first raised at the eighth session of the Committee at Buenos Aires (Argentina) in 1984 and that the Committee had requested IUCN to consult with ICOMOS and the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA) to organise a task force on this subject. The meeting of this task force had taken place at the headquarters of ICOMOS (Paris) on 11 October 1985.
26. The representative of IUCN presented document SC-85/CONF.008/3, which summarized the main points of discussion of the task force and its conclusions, ...
34. The Committee noted that, at a meeting of the Bureau during its session, consideration had been given to the procedure for the approval of large-scale technical cooperation requests. (...) In order to streamline the decision-making process, the Committee approved the Bureau's recommendations on the following points:
The ceiling for small-scale technical cooperation requests which can be approved by the Chairman at any time of the year should remain at $20.000 per project. The Chairman could not approve requests submitted by his own country.
The Bureau should be authorized by ...
26. The Committee took note of document SC-87/CONF.005/8 presenting the promotional activities undertaken in 1987 and those foreseen for 1988. The Committee congratulated the Secretariat on its work and emphasised the need to expand this promotion programme.
27. It was recalled that States Parties have a responsibility in strengthening promotional activities. Several members of the Committee mentioned the activities undertaken in their respective countries, such as the production of stamps or pamphlets on world heritage sites in Yugoslavia and India, or the publication and sale at ...
37. When examining the proposal to extend Kakadu National Park (Australia), the Committee recognised that there were no indications in the "Operational Guidelines" for States Parties in proposing extensions to sites inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee therefore requested the Secretariat to incorporate such indications, particularly concerning the documentation to be made available to enable the Bureau and the Committee to examine such proposals.
42. The representative of Algeria noted that the present composition of the World Heritage Committee was somewhat imbalanced in terms of geographical representation, with a particular lack of representation of African States Parties. This meant that there was a resulting imbalance in the representation of cultural regions. The Algerian representative suggested that the Bureau and the Committee should re-examine the voting procedure for the General Assembly of States Parties.
43. The Committee agreed that there was a need to ensure an equitable representation of the different regions and ...
12. The Chairman of the Working Group, H.E. Ananda Guruge (Sri Lanka) presented the recommendations drafted by the Working Group. He stressed how important it was that the work of the Committee be facilitated through careful preparation and submittance of nominations of cultural properties by States Members, a more active Secretariat contribution when checking files, and a selective presentation of proposals by ICOMOS and by the Bureau. He also noted the progress that could be achieved through a reorganization of the Committee's agenda. The Chairman of the Working Group clarified that ...
20. The Secretary presented document SC-88/CONF.001/3 on the revision of the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. The Committee noted that the modifications proposed in this document resulted from three different actions, namely:
changes introduced in accordance with the Committee's decisions concerning the monitoring of cultural properties, the procedure for nomination of extensions to World Heritage properties and assistance for promotional activities;
modifications required to update the Operational Guidelines to make them conform with ...
23. The Committee recalled that the revised versions of forms for nominating sites for inscription on the World Heritage List and for requesting international assistance from the World Heritage Fund had been prepared in accordance with the Operational Guidelines and had been already examined by the Bureau at its 13th session. The Bureau members had since then provided comments which were incorporated in the documents submitted to the Committee. The Committee adopted these revised documents in principle, requesting the Committee members to send any additional suggestions they may have to ...
14 COM VIII.19-24
Monitoring of the State of Conservation of World Heritage Cultural Properties and Related Technical Problems
19. The Committee congratulated the Secretariat on the quality of its report on the monitoring of the state of conservation of world heritage cultural properties. It noted the various situations brought to its attention and was particularly pleased to see that the Director General of Unesco had informed Egyptian authorities of the concerns expressed by the Bureau at its fourteenth session in June 1990 regarding planned construction work in the pyramid fields from Giza to Dahshur, Egypt. In this connection, the Committee confirmed that it wished to examine, in due time, the master plan ...
56. The Committee examined Document SC-91/CONF.002/10 and recommended that the Secretariat in co-operation with the International Union for Geological Sciences (IUGS), IUCN, and other experts proceed with the revision of the natural heritage criteria to reflect separately geological, biological, ecological and aesthetic phenomena and modify the requested conditions of integrity accordingly. The Committee requested the Secretariat and IUCN to co-operate in the revision of the natural heritage criteria and the conditions of integrity in order to submit draft proposals for the consideration ...
16 COM VII.1-3
Presentation of the Evaluation Report on the Implementation of the Convention and the Draft Strategy for the Future
VII. 1 The document WHC-92/CONF.2/4 was introduced by Mrs. C Cameron, Chairperson of the Expert Group which was convened in Washington (United States of America) from 22 to 24 June 1992, then in Paris at UNESCO Headquarters, from 27 to 30 October 1992. Mrs. Cameron stressed that on the one hand the group comprised a certain number of experts from different regions of the world, and representatives of ICOMOS, ICCROM and IUCN, and on the other, Bureau members had participated in the work of the Paris meeting. The discussions of the working group were based on the evaluation report for the ...
XIII.1 Natural Heritage Criteria
XIII.1.1 The Bureau examined document WHC-92/CONF.002/10 in the light of introductory remarks made by the Representative of IUCN and changes proposed by the Delegation of the United States of America. The Committee adopted the revised natural heritage criteria and the conditions of integrity amended in accordance with the proposals made by the United States Delegation. The Committee requested the Centre to revise the Operational Guidelines accordingly and submit them to the Bureau for verification and approval so that the revised criteria for ...
XIV.1 The former Rapporteur of the Committee introduced the working document WHC-93/CONF.002/11 consisting of a revised text of the Operational Guidelines concerninq the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. This text took into consideration the request of the Committee, expressed at its session in Santa Fe in 1992, that the Strategic Orientations be incorporated in the Guidelines, together with the proposals made by two States Parties, Italy and the United States of America. He explained that the Bureau, at its seventeenth session (Paris, June 1993) examined the proposed ...