Factors affecting the property in 2000*
  • Commercial development
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Housing
  • Major visitor accommodation and associated infrastructure
  • Management activities
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Solid waste
  • Other Threats:

    Conservation of antiquities

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • impact of new hotels under construction in the vicinity of the World Heritage site of Petra
  • insufficiency or non-existence of sewage disposal facilities
  • uncontrolled development of villages in the vicinity of the site
  • proliferation of shops
  • insufficient conservation of antiquities
  • construction or road widening projects leading to the site
  • other encroachments upon the integrity of the site
  • heavy floodings in 1996 (issue resolved) 
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2000
Requests approved: 2 (from 1987-1995)
Total amount approved : 79,500 USD
1995 Flash flood control at Petra (Approved)   29,500 USD
1987 Contribution towards research work on weathering and ... (Approved)   50,000 USD
Information presented to the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 2000

New information: At the request of the Jordanian authorities, the Deputy Director of the Centre undertook a mission to Jordan to study future co-operation prospects. He will report on the state of conservation of the site of Petra during the Bureau session.

Action Required
The Bureau may wish to examine information that will be made available at the time of its session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2000

Upon the request of the World Heritage Committee, ICOMOS undertook a mission for the tourism management of the site, the physical and economic development of the vicinity, including the possibility of integrating the Dana Reserve into the work and a detailed review of the state of conservation of Petra. ICOMOS will report the findings of the mission at the session of the Bureau.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2000
24 BUR IV.B.68
Petra (Jordan)

The Deputy Director reported on his mission to Jordan at the beginning of May and in particular his visit to Petra where he worked with the representatives of the Antiquities Directorate and the "Petra Regional Planning Council".  He also met with the President of the Petra National Trust that financed the cleaning-up operations and the presentation of the "Siq".  He briefly reported to the Bureau on the situation at the archaeological site and its environmental problems, including the urban expansion in Wadi Musa and the disputes with the inhabitants of the area.  He also informed the Bureau of the success in transposing the hotels from Wadi Musa to Taybé, located at a fair distance from the site.

The Delegate of Morocco insisted on the importance of the problem with the population at Petra and suggested that a synergy with the adjacent Dana Biosphere Reserve be sought.  The Delegate of Greece suggested that the ICOMOS Committee on Cultural Tourism be associated with the work of the Secretariat concerning Petra.  Renovation works at the site could be financed partly by income coming from tourism. The Bureau commended the authorities and the parties involved for the protection and presentation work already undertaken.  It requested the Secretariat to agree to the request of the "Petra Regional Planning Council" to send a mission for the tourism management of the site and the physical and economic development of the vicinity, including the possibility of integrating the Dana Reserve into this work.  The Bureau also requested ICOMOS to include in the same mission a specialist to evaluate the state of conservation and the presentation of the archaeological site.  Finally, the Bureau requested that a detailed report on Petra be submitted to its twenty-fifth session in 2001.

24 COM VIII.iii.35-43
State of conservation reports of cultural properties which the Committee noted

VIII.35 Brasilia (Brazil)

Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China)

The Potala Palace, Lhasa (China)

VIII.36 Islamic Cairo (Egypt)

VIII.37 Roman Monuments, Cathedral St Peter and Liebfrauen-Church in Trier (Germany)

Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany)

Classical Weimar (Germany)

Hortabagy National Park (Hungary)

VIII.38 Khajuraho Group of Monuments (India)

Sun Temple of Konarak (India)

Petra (Jordan)

Luang Prabang (Lao People's Democratic Republic)

Byblos (Lebanon)

Ksar Ait Ben Haddou (Morocco)

VIII.39 Island of Mozambique (Mozambique)

Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)

Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo - San Lorenzo (Panama)

Archaeological Site of Chavin (Peru)

VIII.40 Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Philippines)

VIII.41 Baroque Churches of the Philippines (Philippines)

VIII.42 Cultural Landscape of Sintra (Portugal)

VIII.43 Istanbul (Turkey)

Complex of Hué Monuments (Vietnam)

The Bureau may wish to examine information that will be provided at the time of its session and take the appropriate decision thereupon.

Report year: 2000
Date of Inscription: 1985
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iii)(iv)

* : 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.