3. Policies Regarding CONSERVATION of World Heritage Properties
3.2. Monitoring
3.2.1. General

Case Law


Synthesis based on relevant Committee decisions

The World Heritage Committee recommends establishing key monitoring indicators to relate more directly to the Outstanding Universal Value to allow for judgment of changes in state of conservation, and adding specific indicators, periodicity and institutional responsibilities (based on Case law on decisions on Nominations).
Date year: 2017 2015 2014
See for examples Decisions (9)
Code: 41 COM 8B.26

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes the Assumption Cathedral of the town-island of Sviyazhsk, Russian Federation, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv);
  3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    The Assumption Cathedral is located in the town–island of Sviyazhsk and is part of the homonymous monastery. Situated at the confluence of the Volga, the Sviyaga and the Shchuka Rivers, at the crossroads of the Silk and Volga routes, Sviyazhsk was founded by Ivan the Terrible in 1551 as the outpost from which to initiate the conquest of the Kazan Khanate. The Assumption Monastery was to function as both missionary and administrative centre for the conquered region. The Cathedral, with its extensive cycles of mural paintings, realised in a relatively short period of time, reflects the ambitious cultural and political programme of the Russian State in the recently conquered Islamic Kazan Khanate, and illustrates new trends in Christian Orthodox art in Russia and Europe.

    The Assumption Monastery in its location, setting, layout and the architectural composition of its buildings contributes to illustrating its political, military and missionary role in the 16th century. The Cathedral is the most outstanding part of the Assumption Monastery Complex: its architecture reflects the prevailing Rus tradition of religious architecture from Moscow, Novgorod, Vladimir and Pskov, shaped upon Byzantine classical heritage as expressed by local craftsmanship and materials. The 18th century renovation of the building with baroque decoration illustrates new trends in art and architecture transposed from Western Europe by Peter the Great into the Russian empire as reference models. The architectural image of the cathedral with its 16th century cycle of wall paintings with scenes from the Old and New Testaments express Ivan IV’s political and religious program to convey his royal power and the power of Orthodoxy to the Tatars, via a comprehensible/acceptable religious vocabulary based on the Old Testament and on the Virgin Mary. St. Nicholas Refectory Church with its bell tower, the Archimandrite building, the monastery school building, the Brethen’s building, and the walls with the Ascension church above the gate supplement and enhance the values of the Assumption Cathedral, illustrating the religious and daily life of Orthodox monasteries in the past. The location and architectural bulk and configuration of the Assumption complex within the town–island of Svyiazhsk made it a prominent complex visible in the distance when approaching the town and express its role as a territorial and religious reference. The cultural layers and archaeological strata preserved in the grounds of the monastery complex and nearby contain 16th-19th century artefacts that are of great interest as a source of information on spiritual, social, artistic and scientific achievements. The Town-Island of Svyiazhsk in its current configuration represents a powerful setting that conveys the sense of an historic outpost settlement.

    Criterion (ii): The Assumption Monastery with its Cathedral is real evidence of cardinal historical and geo-political interchanges in Eurasia at a time when the Rus State undertook its expansion eastwards. The architecture and Mariological cycle of wall-paintings of the Cathedral exceptionally reflect the interaction of the Christian-Orthodox and Muslim cultures and interchanges with Western Christian religious iconographical themes, e.g. the Creation or the Proto-evangelical and Evangelical cycles. The unique style of wall-painting and icons of the Assumption Cathedral iconostasis resulted from the fusion of artistic forces of large artistic centres of the Russian state, such as Novgorod, Pskov and Moscow, as well as of masters of the Volga region towns and artists working in the Rostov and Suzdal regions. The Iconostasis pictorial complex is part of the whole artistic system of the Cathedral.

    Criterion (iv): The Assumption Monastery with the Cathedral illustrates in its location, layout and architectural composition the political and missionary programme developed by Tsar Ivan IV to extend the Moscow state from European lands to the post-Golden Horde Islamic states. The architecture of the Assumption Cathedral embodies the synthesis of traditional ancient Pskov architecture, a monumental Moscow art of building, and construction traditions of the Volga region. The Assumption Cathedral frescoes are among the rarest examples of Eastern Orthodox mural paintings. The iconographic program of the cathedral includes themes of the Creation and iconographic interpretations of traditional cycles of Proto-evangelic and Evangelic history, reflecting absolutely new trends for Russian religious art and expressing new theological concepts and Tsar Ivan IV’s political programme. 


    All elements necessary to convey the Outstanding Universal Value of the property are contained within its boundaries. The Assumption Monastery complex with the Cathedral and the other stone buildings is contained within its historic perimeter and the whole complex depicts its historic political and religious functions. Overall, the property exhibits acceptable condition, following conservation, restoration and reconstruction interventions. However, there are some unresolved problems concerning structural instability and unstable indoor environmental parameters in the Cathedral, as well as soil erosion and instability, that are being studied and addressed. Tourism and tourism-related development pressures on the buffer zone and particularly on the town-island of Svyiazhsk are being controlled, but need close monitoring from the relevant authorities.


    The location, setting, layout and composition of the Assumption Monastery complex and of its structures are key to understanding its role as a missionary post in a settlement that was strategic from a military and political perspective when it was founded. The architecture of the Assumption Cathedral reflects in its configuration and substance at least two significant stages of its development, dating back to its construction and decoration in the 16th century and its baroque rearrangement in the 18th century. The entire cycle of mural paintings in its interior are key sources of information that credibly attest to the Outstanding Universal Value of the property. The architecture and mural paintings of the refectory and of St. Nicholas Refectory Church complement the iconographic programme of the cathedral. With the exception of the Cathedral, which retains most of its historic fabric in architectural and artistic terms, the buildings within the monastic complex have undergone interventions of different degrees of restoration or reconstruction, which, however, do not prevent them from substantially contributing to illustrating the value of the property.

    Protection and management requirements

    An array of federal and State legislation ensures that the property and its buffer zone are adequately protected. The whole territory of the buffer zone is legally protected and provided with legally established sub-zones and related regulations. Natural values of the area are also legally protected at the state and federal level and by a much larger UNESCO biosphere reserve designation (Great Volzhsko-Kamsky). To ensure effective protection, the legal provisions/restrictions are integrated into the relevant territorial and urban planning for the districts and the municipalities. All state and local authorities ensure implementation of land-use regulations and restrictions; an interdepartmental commission on town planning ensures compliance of any project proposal falling into the buffer zone with the objectives and requirements for the protection of the property.

    An established Coordinating Committee is tasked with advice on decision-making and has a monitoring role on the implementation of the management plan. The effective management of the property derives from the coordination of the various legal and planning instruments and close collaboration among the different institutions; careful consideration of tourism pressures needs to be integrated into any development plan or programme.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Developing a complete diagnosis of the problems of the Cathedral and including considerations of the potential negative impact of certain conservation materials (e.g. grouting mortars) on the murals,
    2. Establishing a permanent monitoring system to keep a continuous record of the structural behaviour and of the interaction of the frescoes with the indoor environmental parameters of the Cathedral,
    3. Avoiding touristic over-exploitation of the property and of the town-island of Svyiazhsk,
    4. Avoiding reconstruction of ‘traditional houses’ on the island for tourism purposes and consider that any reconstruction in this part of the buffer zone should be limited as much as possible, based on a comprehensive plan defining in advance what is planned to be rebuilt and for what reasons, and on the results of a Heritage Impact Assessment,
    5. Expanding the tourism strategy to encompass the wider territory of the buffer zone to spread tourism facilities and services outside of the Island, thus decreasing tourism pressure on the town-island,
    6. Carrying out a carrying-capacity study for the Island with regard to tourism and the envisaged museum development strategy;
  5. Decides that the name of the property be changed to: Assumption Cathedral and Monastery of the town-island of Sviyazhsk.

Read more about the decision
Code: 41 COM 8B.27

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Defers the examination of the nomination of Talayotic Minorca, Spain, on the World Heritage List in order to allow the State Party, with the advice of ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre, if requested, to:
    1. Clarify the definition of 'Talayotic' and its reference to a 'culture' or a 'period.’ In addition to the focus on monuments and architecture, a wider range of archaeological evidence, including stone and metal tools, ceramic vessels and other equipment, as well as faunal data and paleoenvironmental indications should be brought into consideration,
    2. Reformulate the nomination to consider either larger components with multiple archaeological sites and landscape elements or a series of the most representative Talayotic sites drawn from Minorca and Majorca. In either case, the time frame of the series should be restricted,
    3. Undertake a refocused comparative analysis based on the revised arguments for Outstanding Universal Value. It should be structured to look first if necessary at an internal analysis that considers sites in Majorca, then at near Mediterranean islands as far as Malta, and finally at near Mediterranean coastlines, followed by eastern Mediterranean islands and coasts, the rest of Europe and other sites around the world. As well as an emphasis on architecture, it should include reference to other types of material culture such as pottery and metallurgy, and these should be used to place the Talayotic sites in a continent-wide context,
    4. Create a common management structure which will be responsible for coordination and effective implementation of the management system for the nominated property as a whole,
    5. Create a Management Plan for the site, which would be distinct from the Island Historic Heritage Management Plan. The Management Plan should include a detailed Conservation Policy to guide conservation interventions, ongoing maintenance work and archaeological research. A section on visitor management should address visitor experience, controlling visitation at some components and the promotion of responsible tourism,
    6. Establish a Landowners Forum or equivalent that would meet at least twice a year to provide feedback and information to landowners about the management of the site,
    7. Create a regular reporting structure for the monitoring program in order to gather the results of the different monitoring activities on a periodic basis and assemble them into a common location;
  3. Considers that any revised nomination would need to be considered by an expert mission to the site.

Read more about the decision
Code: 41 COM 8B.28

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes Aphrodisias, Turkey, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii), (iv) and (vi);
  3. Takes note of the following provisional Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief Synthesis

    Aphrodisias is located in southwestern Turkey, in the fertile valley formed by the Morsynus River, in the ancient region of Caria. The history of the area comprising Aphrodisias dates back to the Late Chalcolithic Period. The city was founded in the 2nd century BC, during the period of intense urbanization in the Meander Valley, and then or later was laid out in a grid around the temple of the goddess Aphrodite. Because the city shared a close interest in the goddess Aphrodite with Sulla, Julius Caesar, and the emperor Augustus, Aphrodisias had a close relationship with Rome. It obtained a privileged ‘tax-free’ political status from the Roman senate, and subsequently developed a strong artistic, sculptural reputation. Aphrodisias remained under Roman rule during the Imperial Period and under Byzantine rule in the late antique and medieval periods.

    The Cult of Aphrodite was the most important cult of Aphrodisias. The sanctuary at Aphrodisias had a distinctive cult statue of Aphrodite which defined the city’s identity. The Aphrodite of Aphrodisias combined aspects of a local Anatolian, archaic fertility goddess with those of the Hellenic Aphrodite, goddess of love and beauty. It distributed this unique identifying image as a religious ‘export’ from Anatolia across the Mediterranean, from the city of Rome to the Levant. The importance of the Aphrodite of Aphrodisias continued well beyond official imperial acceptance of Christianity; the Temple did not become a church until c. 500 AD. 

    The proximity of the marble quarries to the city was a major reason that Aphrodisias became an outstanding high-quality production center for marble sculpture and developed sculptors who were famous throughout the Roman Empire. The longevity of high-standard production of sculpture in Aphrodisias assures its role as a unique place in human cultural history and makes important contributions to our understanding of ancient monumental art in its local contexts of social interaction. At the same time, the techniques and the highly skilled use of marble, the quality of local artistic design, and the production of advanced portrait sculpture give Aphrodisias a unique place in modern scholarship.

    A distinctive Greek-Roman political and cultural system is embodied and enacted in Aphrodisias’s surviving urban fabric. This distinctive urban culture of Anatolia under Roman rule represents the urban system and planning characteristics of the Greek and Roman periods, with all public facilities and monuments specific to those eras. Because its archaeological preservation is better than that of any other sites in Caria, Aphrodisias provides modern scholars with a useful example of a typical Carian cult center, particularly in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

    Embedded in this surviving settlement pattern is another unique aspect of Aphrodisias, its cosmopolitan social structure (Greek, Roman, Carian, pagan, Jewish, Christian) that is abundantly articulated in the site’s 2000 surviving inscriptions. When all the above described characteristics of the site are considered together they reveal the significance of Aphrodisias in world history.

    Criterion (ii): The exceptional production of sculpted marble at Aphrodisias blends local, Greek, and Roman traditions, themes, and iconography. It is visible throughout the city in an impressive variety of forms, from large decorated architectural blocks to over life-statues to small portable votive figures. The proximity of good quarries with both pure white and grey marbles was a strong catalyst and enabling factor for the swift development of the city as a noted centre for marble-carving and marble-carvers. The great ability of Aphrodisian sculptors was well noted in antiquity and sought after even in metropolitan Rome where signatures of Aphrodisian sculptures appear on some of the finest works from Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli. These sculptors were major players in the art market in the Empire between 1st and 5th century AD and thus have contributed to the development of the western sculptural tradition.

    Criterion (iii): Aphrodisias occupies an important place in the study of urban culture in Asia Minor from the late Hellenistic period to Late Antiquity. Like many other cities in the region, Aphrodisias blends aspects of Greek tradition with a variety of received elements of the Roman Empire. Aphrodisias stands out because of its extraordinary state of preservation and extensive epigraphic documentation and because of its cultic and historical importance. It was a unique Carian centre for Aphrodite, a city with special privileges under the Empire, and a provincial capital in Late Antiquity. Moreover, its quarries and its sculpture workshops made it an important art centre, famous for its creativity and high-quality technical skill in marble carving. Aphrodisias has one of the very few known and systematically excavated sculpture workshops of the Roman Empire, which provides a fuller understanding of the production of marble sculpture than almost anywhere else in the Roman world.

    Criterion (iv): Aphrodisias bears exceptional testimony to the built environment of a Greco-Roman city in inland Asia Minor. Several of its monumental buildings have unique features in terms of architecture and design, and many are outstanding simply in terms of their state of preservation and conservation. The Sebasteion, a remarkable cult complex for the worship of Augustus and the Julio-Claudian emperors, represents a distinctive integration of Hellenistic, Roman and Aphrodisian artistic traditions. The so-called Archive Wall in the theater is a famous example of a well-preserved collection of official imperial documents regarding the status of the city under the Empire. The Theater also features the earliest known scene building with an aediculated façade. The Stadium, which has a peculiar architectural form known as “amphitheatrical”, is the best-preserved as well as one of the largest buildings of this stadium type in the whole ancient world. The conversion of the Temple of Aphrodite into a cathedral, around 500 AD, is unique among all known temple-to-church conversions in its scale, engineering, and transformative effect. The entire original architectural structure of the Tetrapylon, the conspicuous entrance to the outer Sanctuary of Aphrodite, is preserved with its elaborate and exquisitely carved architectural ornament. The South Agora is exceptional in terms of size, shape, and lack of parallels in an ancient urban setting.

    Criterion (vi): Aphrodisias was famous in antiquity as the cult center of a unique version of Aphrodite which amalgates aspects of an archaic Anatolian fertility goddess with those of the Hellenic goddess of love and beauty. The Aphrodite of Aphrodisias appears in marble figures from the site of Aphrodisias itself as well as from many other locations around the Mediterranean. This dissemination of the cult image is strong evidence of the regional and supra-regional importance of the cult. The city was also famed as a place of philosophical activity under the high empire and in Late Antiquity. Alexander of Aphrodisias, the most celebrated of the ancient commentators on the works of Aristotle, is considered one of the most important thinkers of the Roman period. A school of Neoplatonic philosophy flourished at Aphrodisias under Asklepiodotos of Alexandria, who was based in the city in the 5th century AD.


    Aphrodisias is of outstanding importance in terms of its unity and integrity. The property has visual integrity and a long, well-studied history from the Bronze Age to the Ottoman Period. The nominated property includes all elements necessary to express its values and does not suffer from significant geomorphological change or intensive human occupation since antiquity. Boundaries of the nominated area draw the limits of the remains at the largest extent which ensures fully representation of outstanding values. The property has been legally taken under control by the State, also many policies and actions have been proposed within the conservation and management plans in order to sustain the integrity of the site.


    Aphrodisias retains its authenticity in terms of form and design, materials and substance, location and setting. This claim is clearly proven by remarkably well-preserved monuments and sculptures, about 2000 surviving incriptions, a comprehensively studied history, and a substantial body of published research. The work of conservation and restoration at Aphrodisias has been undertaken in conformity with the Charter of Venice, respecting their original design and building materials. The landscape dominating the environment of Aphrodisias has never been exposed either to development or to mass tourism and offers visitors the experience of feeling the ambiance of a Greco-Roman city in its historical context.

    Protection and management requirements

    The Ministry of Culture and Tourism with its central and local branches and the excavation team are the main responsible bodies for the conservation, protection, promotion and management of the site. The archaeological site is excavated, researched and conserved by the excavation team which is authorized by the government on a yearly base, and the work carried out is regularly monitored by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.

    The site is registered on the National Inventory and is protected within the framework of the Act on the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Property No. 2863. A Conservation Plan for the Archaeological Site was prepared, and approved by the relevant Regional Conservation Council in 2002.

    Aphrodisias Management Plan, which was prepared under the surveillance of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, was approved on 17 September 2013.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Updating the Management Plan to reflect the revised boundaries and protections for the property,
    2. Providing the legal protection for the entirety of the buffer zone,
    3. Increasing efforts to integrate the local community into the management system for the property,
    4. Formulating and implementing monitoring indicators for the quarry component,
    5. Implementing the drainage rehabilitation plan within the walled city at a quicker pace,
    6. Developing a fire response plan and providing training in fire suppression, as well as mobile water tanks in the summer as an interim measure until a permanent fire suppression system is installed,
    7. Expanding the patrols by the agricultural guards to include the quarry component and the whole of the buffer zone,
    8. Conducting a full 3D inventory of the quarry faces in order to provide a baseline record of their condition,
    9. Implementing remedial conservation measures within the quarry component;
  5. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 December 2019 a report on the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 44th session in 2020.

Read more about the decision
Code: 41 COM 8B.31

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B.Add and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1.Add,
  2. Recalling Decision 37 COM 7A.32 adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013) which “Requests the State Party to submit, by 1 February 2014, a request for a major boundary modification for the property to allow Gelati Monastery to justify the criterion on its own”;
  3. Approves the significant boundary modification of Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery, Georgia to exclude Bagrati Cathedral, to become Gelati Monastery, Georgia;
  4. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    On the lower southern slopes of the mountains of the Northern Caucasus, Gelati Monastery reflects the 'golden age' of medieval Georgia, a period of political strength and economic growth between the reigns of King David IV 'the Builder' (1089-1125) and Queen Tamar (1184-1213). It was David who, in 1106 began building the monastery near his capital Kutaisi on a wooded hill above the river Tskaltsitela. The main church was completed in 1130 in the reign of his son and successor Demetré. Further churches were added to the monastery throughout the 13th and early 14th centuries. The monastery is richly decorated with mural paintings from the 12th to 17th centuries, as well as a 12th century mosaic in the apse of the main church, depicting the Virgin with Child flanked by archangels. Its high architectural quality, outstanding decoration, size, and clear spatial quality combine to offer a vivid expression of the artistic idiom of the architecture of the Georgian “Golden Age” and its almost completely intact surroundings allow an understanding of the intended fusion between architecture and landscape.

    Gelati was not simply a monastery: it was also a centre of science and education, and the Academy established there was one of the most important centres of culture in ancient Georgia. King David gathered eminent intellectuals to his Academy such as Johannes Petritzi, a Neo-Platonic philosopher best known for his translations of Proclus, and Arsen Ikaltoeli, a learned monk, whose translations of doctrinal and polemical works were compiled into his Dogmatikon, or book of teachings, influenced by Aristotelianism. Gelati also had a scriptorium were monastic scribes copied manuscripts (although its location is not known). Among several books created there, the best known is an amply illuminated 12th century gospel, housed in the National Centre of Manuscripts.

    As a royal monastery, Gelati possessed extensive lands and was richly endowed with icons, including the well-known gold mounted Icon of the Virgin of Khakhuli (now housed in the Georgian National Museum) and at its peak, it reflected the power and high culture of Eastern Christianity.

    Criterion (iv): Gelati Monastery is the masterpiece of the architecture of the “Golden Age” of Georgia and the best representative of its architectural style, characterized by the full facing of smoothly hewn large blocks, perfectly balanced proportions, and the exterior decoration of blind arches. The main church of the monastery is one of the most important examples of the cross-in-square architectural type that had a crucial role in the East Christian church architecture from the 7th century onwards. Gelati is one of the largest Medieval Orthodox monasteries, distinguished for its harmony with its natural setting and a well thought-out overall planning concept.

    The main church of the Gelati Monastery is the only Medieval monument in the larger historic region of Eastern Asia Minor and the Caucasus that still has well-preserved mosaic decoration, comparable with the best Byzantine mosaics, as well as having the largest ensemble of paintings of the middle Byzantine, late Byzantine, and post-Byzantine periods in Georgia, including more than 40 portraits of kings, queens, and high clerics and the earliest depiction of the seven Ecumenical Councils.


    The whole monastic precinct is included in the property and contains all the main 12th century buildings as well as those added in the 13th century. All the attributes necessary to express the Outstanding Universal Value are present and included in the area. No important original feature of the monastery from the 12th and 13th centuries have been lost during the centuries, and its landscape setting remains largely intact. Not all buildings are in a good state of conservation.

    Some development pressures exist, in the buffer zone and the wider setting of the property but the level of threats is low and the processes are currently under control.


    Overall, the architectural forms, spatial arrangement and decoration fully convey their value. For a long period, major parts of the mural paintings were in a bad state of conservation. With the repair of the roofs, the process of degradation has been slowed down and restoration work undertaken although some remain vulnerable.

    The Academy building which was roofless in 1994 at the time of inscription was re-roofed with reversible material in 2009. The extensive buffer zone allows a full appreciation of the harmony between the enclosed monastery and its natural setting.

    Protection and management requirements

    Gelati monastery has been a Listed Monument of National Significance since the Soviet period and was listed in the Georgian National Register of Monuments by presidential decree in 2006. The cultural protection area was enlarged beyond Gelati Monastery to encompass the buffer zone in a Decree of the Minister of Culture and Monument Protection in 2014. The buffer zone is protected for its monuments but also for visual attributes. The natural values of the surrounding landscape are regulated by the Forest Code of Georgia, the Law on Soil Protection, the Law on Environmental Protection and the Water law that constitute the legal framework for the management of the forests and the rivers in the area. Applications for new constructions or reconstructions, including the infrastructure and earthworks within the buffer zone require the approval of the Cultural Heritage Protection Council, Section for Cultural Heritage Protected Zones, and the Agency of Urban Heritage.

    Conservation work is guided by the Conservation Master Plan, produced by the Ministry of Culture, Monuments Protection and Sports of Georgia in collaboration with the Orthodox Church of Georgia. This plan covers conservation of the built structures as well as proposals to support the revival of monastic life that started in the 1990s and the needs of visitors. Adequate resources for long-term conservation programmes need to be sustained. A system of documentation for all conservation and restoration work and tri-dimensional measuring and monitoring of the overall stability of the various monastic buildings need to be put in place.

    A Memorandum on Collaboration on Cultural Heritage Issues between the Georgian Apostolic Autocephaly Orthodox Church and the Ministry of Culture and Monument Protection of Georgia has been agreed for all properties of the church. Day to day management of the property is entrusted to the monastic community who live in the property. Longer term interventions are implemented by the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia. Its local representative agency is the Kutaisi Historical Architectural Museum-Reserve who is also responsible for visitor reception.

    The Management Plan 2017-2021 reflects contributions of the Church, and relevant government bodies and community groups who were involved in the consultation process. It aims to set out a shared vision for the property. The Plan was developed in harmony with the Conservation Master Plan, with the Imereti Tourism development strategy, and with the 2014 management plan for the Imereti Protected Areas that includes the valley and canyon of the Tskaltsitela River in the buffer zone. It needs approval to become fully operational and enforceable by relevant authorities. A Management Committee for the property remains to be appointed and it is necessary for key roles and responsibilities to be established.

  5. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Ensuring adequate resources for long-term programmes of restoration for the fabric of the monastery and its mural paintings,
    2. Developing a clear system of documentation for any conservation and restoration work,
    3. Putting in place tri-dimensional measuring and monitoring to help gain a better understanding of the overall stability of the various buildings in the monastery;
    4. Approving and implementing the management structure for the property with clear responsibilities for the various agencies and organisations involved in its management,
    5. Setting up a Coordinating Committee for the property with representation from key stakeholders,
    6. Putting in place a mechanism that will allow the Management Plan, or part of it, to have status in planning processes,
    7. Registering as soon as possible the land rights in order to avoid land disputes,
    8. Submitting full details of proposals for covering excavated cellar areas next to the Academy, outlining the new visitor access arrangements and location of new domestic quarters for monks, including the archaeological profile of the chosen area, to the World Heritage Centre for review by ICOMOS at the earliest opportunity and before any commitments are made, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines,
    9. Augmenting the monitoring indicators to reflect the attributes of Outstanding Universal Value;
  6. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 December 2019 a report on the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 44th session in 2020.

Read more about the decision
Code: 41 COM 8B.33

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Approves the extension of the Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar and Dessau, to include the Houses with Balcony Access in Dessau and the ADGB Trade Union School in Bernau and to become the Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar, Dessau and Bernau, Germany, on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi);
  3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    Between 1919 and 1933, the Bauhaus School, based first in Weimar and then in Dessau, revolutionized architectural and aesthetic concepts and practices. The buildings created and decorated by the School’s professors (Henry van de Velde, Walter Gropius, Hannes Meyer, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy and Wassily Kandinsky) launched the Modern Movement, which shaped much of the architecture of the 20th century and beyond. Component parts of the property are the Former Art School, the Applied Art School and the Haus am Horn in Weimar, the Bauhaus Building, the group of seven Masters’ Houses and the Houses with Balcony Access in Dessau, and the ADGB Trade Union School in Bernau. The Bauhaus represents the desire to develop a modern architecture using the new materials of the time (reinforced concrete, glass, steel) and construction methods (skeleton construction, glass facades). Based on the principle of function, the form of the buildings rejects the traditional, historical symbols of representation. In a severely abstract process, the architectural forms – both the subdivided building structure and the individual structural elements – are reduced to their primary, basic forms; they derive their expression, characteristic of Modernist architecture, from a composition of interconnecting cubes in suggestive spatial transparency.

    The Bauhaus was a centre for new ideas and consequently attracted progressive architects and artists. The Bauhaus School has become the symbol of modern architecture, both for its educational theory and its buildings, throughout the world, and is inseparable from the name of Walter Gropius. Hannes Meyer, his successor as director of the Bauhaus, realized the idea of collective work on a building project within the framework of training in the Bauhaus’s building department. These buildings stand for an architectural quality that derives from the scientifically-based design methodology and the functional-economic design with social objectives. The Bauhaus itself and the other buildings designed by the masters of the Bauhaus are fundamental representatives of Classical Modernism and as such are essential components, which represent the 20th century. Their consistent artistic grandeur is a reminder of the still-uncompleted project for “modernity with a human face“, which sought to use the technical and intellectual resources at its disposal not in a destructive way but to create a living environment worthy of human aspirations.

    For this reason, they are important monuments not only for art and culture, but also for the historic ideas of the 20th century. Even though the Bauhaus philosophy of social reform turned out to be little more than wishful thinking, its utopian ideal became reality through the form of its architecture. Its direct accessibility still has the power to fascinate and belongs to the people of all nations as their cultural heritage.

    Criterion (ii): The Bauhaus buildings in Weimar, Dessau and Bernau are central works of European modern art, embodying an avant-garde conception directed towards a radical renewal of architecture and design in a unique and widely influential way. They testify to the cultural blossoming of Modernism, which began here, and has had an effect worldwide.

    Criterion (iv): The Bauhaus itself and the other buildings designed by the masters of the Bauhaus are fundamental representatives of Classical Modernism and as such are essential components which represent the 20th century. The Houses with Balcony Access in Dessau and the ADGB Trade Union School are unique products of the Bauhaus’s goal of unity of practice and teaching.

    Criterion (vi): The Bauhaus architectural school was the foundation of the Modern Movement which was to revolutionize artistic and architectural thinking and practice in the 20th century.


    The Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar, Dessau and Bernau includes all elements necessary to express the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, reflecting the development of Modernism, which was to have worldwide influence in the visual arts, applied art, architecture, and urban planning. The seven component parts are of adequate size to ensure protection of the features and processes which convey the significance of the property.


    Although the three buildings in Weimar have undergone several alterations and partial reconstructions, their authenticity is attested (apart from the reconstructed murals in the two Schools). Similarly, despite the level of reconstruction, the Bauhaus Building in Dessau preserves its original appearance and atmosphere, largely thanks to the major restoration work carried out in 1976. As for the Masters’ Houses, the restoration work carried out was based on thorough research and may be considered as meeting the conditions of authenticity. The Houses with Balcony Access and the ADGB Trade Union School largely preserve their original state in terms of form, design, material and substance and thereby provide authentic evidence of the sole architectural legacies of the Bauhaus building department.

    Protection and management requirements

    The two former Art Schools, the Applied Art School and the Haus am Horn in Weimar are protected by listing in the Register of Historical Monuments of the Free State of Thuringia as unique historical monuments under the provisions of the Thuringian Protection of Historic Monuments Act of 7 January 1992. The Bauhaus, the Masters’ Houses and the Houses with Balcony Access are listed in the equivalent Register of the State of Saxony-Anhalt (Protection of Historical Monuments Act of 21 October 1991). The ADGB Trade Union School is registered on the monuments list of the Federal State of Brandenburg and is therefore protected by its law for the protection and conservation of historical monuments of 22 July 1991.The Bauhaus Building and the Masters’ Houses are used by the Bauhaus Dessau Foundation, a public foundation. In Weimar, Dessau and Bernau the status of registered historic monuments guarantees that the requirements for monument protection will be taken into account in any regional development plans. There is also a buffer zone, reflecting a monument zone, for the protection of the World Heritage property.

    Overall responsibility for protection of the Weimar monuments is with the State Chancellery of the Free State of Thuringia, for those in Dessau with the Ministry of Culture of the State of Saxony-Anhalt, and in Bernau with the Ministry of Science, Research and Culture of the State of Brandenburg, in all cases operating through their respective State Offices for the Preservation of Historical Monuments.

    Direct management is assigned to the appropriate State and municipal authorities, operating under their respective protection regulations. In Dessau, the site of the Bauhaus itself and the Masters’ Houses are managed by the Foundation Bauhaus Dessau (Stiftung Bauhaus Dessau). The respective monument protection acts of the Federal States ensure the conservation and maintenance of the objects and clarify areas and means of action. The largely identical aims, regulations and principles of these acts establish a uniform legislative basis for the management of the components at the different sites. A steering group with representatives of the owners and the authorities involved acts as a communication platform and coordinates overarching activities concerning compliance with the World Heritage Convention or the research into and the presentation of World Heritage.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Considering the restoration of the glazing of the staircases on four of the Houses with Balcony Access,
    2. Giving special attention to the ADGB Trade Union School’s surrounding landscape,
    3. Detailing the monitoring indicators.

Read more about the decision
Code: 41 COM 8B.38

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC/17/41.COM/8B.Add, WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B1.Add and WHC/17/41.COM/INF.8B2.Add,
  2. Taking note that the proposal is appropriate in relation to natural criteria, and enhances the overall integrity, protection and management of the property,
  3. Approves the proposed minor modification to the boundaries of Mount Wuyi, China;
  4. Requests the State Party with the support of ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre to:
    1. Undertake further study to address the concerns in relation to cultural values of the property,
    2. Provide in detail the rationale for the delineation of the buffer zone and a topographical map in relation to the surrounding villages and the Wuyi Mountain National Reserve (Jiangxi Province) by 1 February 2018.

Read more about the decision
Code: 39 COM 8B.25

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC-15/39.COM/8B and WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus District with Chilehaus, Germany, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv);
  3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    Speicherstadt and the adjacent Kontorhaus district are two densely built central urban areas in the German port city of Hamburg. Speicherstadt, originally developed on a 1.1-km-long group of narrow islands in the Elbe River between 1885 and 1927 (and partly rebuilt from 1949 to 1967), is one of the largest unified historic port warehouse complexes in the world. The adjacent Kontorhaus district is a cohesive, densely built area featuring eight mainly very large office complexes that were built from the 1920s to the 1950s to house businesses engaged in port-related activities. Together, these neighbouring districts represent an outstanding example of a combined warehouse-office district associated with a port city. Speicherstadt, the “city of warehouses,” includes 15 very large warehouse blocks that are inventively historicist in appearance but advanced in their technical installations and equipment, as well as six ancillary buildings and a connecting network of streets, canals and bridges. Anchored by the iconic Chilehaus, the Kontorhaus district’s massive office buildings stand out for their early Modernist brick-clad architecture and their unity of function. The Chilehaus, Messberghof, Sprinkenhof, Mohlenhof, Montanhof, former Post Office Building at Niedernstrasse 10, Kontorhaus Burchardstrasse 19-21 and Miramar-Haus attest to architectural and city-planning concepts that were emerging in the early 20th century. The effects engendered by the rapid growth of international trade at the end of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th century are illustrated by the outstanding examples of buildings and ensembles that are found in these two functionally complementary districts.

    Criterion (iv): Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus District with Chilehaus contains outstanding examples of the types of buildings and ensembles that epitomize the consequences of the rapid growth in international trade in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Their high-quality designs and functional construction, in the guise of historicism and Modernism, respectively, make this an exceptional ensemble of maritime warehouses and Modernist office buildings.


    Speicherstadt and the Kontorhaus district contain all the elements necessary to express the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, including the buildings, spaces, structures, and waterways that epitomize the consequences of the rapid growth in international trade in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and that illustrate the property’s high-quality designs and functional construction. The 26.08-ha property is of adequate size to ensure the complete representation of the features and processes that convey the property’s significance, and it does not suffer from adverse effects of development or neglect.


    Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus district is substantially authentic in its location and setting, its forms and designs, and its materials and substances. The maritime location is unchanged, though considerable changes have been made to the adjacent urban setting. Speicherstadt was significantly damaged during the Second World War, but this has not reduced the ability to understand the value of the property. The forms and designs of the property as a whole, as well as its materials and substances, have largely been maintained. The function of the Kontorhaus district has also been maintained. The links between the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and its attributes are therefore truthfully expressed, and the attributes fully convey the value of the property.

    Protection and management requirements

    The property, which is owned by a combination of public and private interests, is within an area listed in the Hamburg Conservation Registry. Speicherstadt was listed under the Hamburg Heritage Protection Act in 1991 and the Kontorhaus district was listed under the Act in 1983 and 2003. The Act, by means of a 2012 amendment, includes a duty to comply with the World Heritage Convention. The competent authority for compliance with the Act is the Department for Heritage Preservation at the Regional Ministry of Culture in Hamburg, which is advised by a Heritage Council of experts, citizens, and institutions. A Management Plan aimed at safeguarding the Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity, and integrity of the property, and protecting its buffer zone, entered into force in 2013.

    The long-term and sustainable safeguarding of Speicherstadt and the Kontorhaus district will require preserving the historic buildings, the characteristic overall impact of the Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus ensembles, and their typical appearance within the townscape; maintaining or improving the quality of life of the residents of Hamburg by safeguarding a unique testimony to Hamburg’s cultural and historical development, which played a key role in establishing its identity; and raising awareness and disseminating information.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Extending in the future the boundaries of the buffer zone in the Cremon-Insel area to become an integral component of the State Party’s commitment to ensure the protection, conservation, and management of the property, and to be officially included in the property’s overall management system;
    2. Expanding the management system to include risk preparedness and visitor/tourism plans that ensure the attributes that support the Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity, and integrity are sustained;
    3. Revising the key indicators of the state of conservation to better relate to the attributes that convey Outstanding Universal Value, and developing and implementing a monitoring system to determine whether the goals set are being achieved;
    4. Carrying out heritage impact assessments in Speicherstadt before any alterations are approved and implemented, in accordance with the ICOMOS Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties.

Read more about the decision
Code: 39 COM 8B.33

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC-15/39.COM/8B and WHC-15/39.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes The Forth Bridge, United Kingdom, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (iv);
  3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

    Brief synthesis

    The Forth Bridge, which spans the estuary (Firth) of the River Forth in eastern Scotland to link Fife to Edinburgh by railway, was the world’s earliest great multispan cantilever bridge, and at 2,529 m remains one of the longest. It opened in 1890 and continues to operate as an important passenger and freight rail bridge. This enormous structure, with its distinctive industrial aesthetic and striking red colour, was conceived and built using advanced civil engineering design principles and construction methods. Innovative in design, materials, and scale, the Forth Bridge is an extraordinary and impressive milestone in bridge design and construction during the period when railways came to dominate long-distance land travel.

    This large-scale engineering work’s appearance is the result of a forthright, unadorned display of its structural elements. It is comprised of about 54,000 tons of mild steel plate rolled and riveted into 4m diameter tubes used in compression, and lighter steel spans used in tension. The use of mild steel, a relatively new material in the 1880s, on such a large-scale project was innovative, and helped to bolster its reputation. The superstructure of the bridge takes the form of three double-cantilever towers rising 110 m above their granite pier foundations, with cantilever arms to each side. The cantilever arms each project 207 m from the towers and are linked together by two suspended spans, each 107 m long. The resulting 521-m spans formed by the three towers were individually the longest in the world for 28 years, and remain collectively the longest in a multi-span cantilever bridge. The Forth Bridge is the culmination of its typology, scarcely repeated but widely admired as an engineering wonder of the world.

    Criterion (i): The Forth Bridge is a masterpiece of creative genius because of its distinctive industrial aesthetic, which is the result of a forthright, unadorned display of its massive, functional structural elements.

    Criterion (iv): The Forth Bridge is an extraordinary and impressive milestone in the evolution of bridge design and construction during the period when railways came to dominate long-distance land travel, innovative in its concept, its use of mild steel, and its enormous scale.


    The property contains all the elements necessary to express the Outstanding Universal Value of The Forth Bridge, including granite piers and steel superstructure. The 7.5-ha property is of adequate size to ensure the complete representation of the features and processes that convey the property’s significance, and it does not suffer from adverse effects of development or neglect.


    The Forth Bridge is fully authentic in form and design, which are virtually unaltered; materials and substance, which have undergone only minimal changes; and use and function, which have continued as originally intended. The links between the Outstanding Universal Value of the bridge and its attributes are therefore truthfully expressed, and the attributes fully convey the value of the property.

    Protection and management requirements

    The Forth Bridge is listed at Category ‘A’ as a building of special architectural or historic interest, giving the property the highest level of statutory protection. Its immediate surroundings are also protected by means of a suite of cultural and natural heritage designations. Owned by Network Rail Limited, the property will be managed in accordance with a Property Management Plan by the bodies that have a statutory planning function. The Forth Bridges Forum partnership has been established to ensure that local stakeholders’ interests remain at the core of the management of the Forth bridges.

    Specific long-term expectations related to key issues include maintenance of strong community support, broadening understanding in the context of world bridges, attention to developments within key views, risk management, and inspiring others.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
    1. Creating key indicators that are more specific and relate more directly to the attributes that convey potential Outstanding Universal Value;
    2. Extending the Property Management Plan to include an interpretation and tourism plan;
    3. Submitting plans for any proposed visitor centre at the earliest possibility to the World Heritage Centre for review, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;
  5. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2016, a report on the selection of key viewsheds and views of the bridge for inclusion in the appropriate planning instruments and management plan, along with an analysis of their effectiveness in ensuring the protection of these key viewsheds and views, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 41st session in 2017.

Read more about the decision
Code: 38 COM 8B.37

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Documents WHC-14/38.COM/8B and WHC-14/38.COM/INF.8B1,
  2. Inscribes Bursa and Cumalıkızık: the Birth of the Ottoman Empire, Turkey, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), (iv) and (vi);
  3. Takes note of the following provisional Statement of Outstanding Universal Value :

    Brief synthesis

    Located on the slopes of Uludağ Mountain (Olympus Mountain of the Bithynians) in the north-western part of Turkey, Bursa and Cumalikizik represent a unique planning methodology for the fast creation of a capital city and Sultans' seat, out of a Byzantine fortress. 

    In the process of the Ottomans’ becoming an Empire, Bursa became the first city, the first capital which was defined by kulliyes and villages, in the context of waqf system (public charity foundation system) shaped according to early Ottoman architectural traditions. 

    While the Ottoman Bursa was being founded, the most important focal points of Bursa, mostly on hills, were identified and the five sultan (Orhan Ghazi, Murad I, Yildirim Bayezid, Celebi Mehmed, Murad II) kulliyes consisting of public buildings such as mosques, madrasahs, hamams, public kitchens and tombs were constructed in these areas. These kulliyes each being a center with social, cultural, religious and educational functions, also determined the boundaries of the city. Houses were constructed according to the location of the kulliyes, and within the course of time these kulliyes were surrounded by neighbourhoods. In the context of the waqf system, the aim of Cumalikizik as a waqf village, meaning that it permanently belonged to an institution (a kulliye), was to provide income for Orhan Ghazi Kulliye, as stated in historical documents.

     The relationship of the five sultan kulliyes, one of which constitutes the core of the city’s commercial centre, and Cumalıkızık which is the best preserved waqf village in Bursa, represent a unique city planning methodology. This methodology (system) developed during the foundation of the first Ottoman capital in early 14th century to the middle of the 15th century, was later used to expand existing cities. 

    Criterion (i): Bursa was created and managed by the first Ottoman sultans, through an innovative and ingenious system, combining an unprecedented “town planning” process. Using the semi-religious brotherhood organizations called Ahi to run commercial life, and thus economy, making the best use of the public charity foundation system, the Waqf, thus society and management, together with the Kulliyes (nuclei providing all public services as infrastructure built prior to the creation of neighbourhoods) and villages, was an ingenious method for the fast establishment of a vivid, sustainable new capital of one of the most important empires of the world. 

    Almost all early 14th century attributes, components of the Kulliyes and of the Khans and Bazaar Area still exist, most of them still serving the same, original functions. The city has grown around them, and they are still the centres of their neighbourhoods.

    Criterion (ii): Bursa has been created as a new town, for non-urban population, to become a capital city. To create the town, centers with social, religious and commercial functions were built, fully reflecting the values of the society and the values it accepted from its neighbours, during long years of migration from central Asia to the West. Bursa was created by a religious Moslem society, carrying the values of Islam to the West, into the still existing Christian Byzantine Empire and into Europe. The best and obvious presentation of these ideas is through mosques, medreses (public religious schools) and public baths built in Bursa in the 14th and 15th centuries, in each neighbourhood centre (kulliye).

     Architectural traditions are partly local creation (like the inverted T plan mosques), but they bear Byzantine, Seljuk, Arab, Persian and other influences. These are represented by building technology, decorations, mausolea construction, technical features (water installations, bathing), typology of buildings (khans, bazaars, bedesten) and others.

     Criterion (iv): Bursa-Cumalikizik illustrate together, through individual buildings (khans, bedesten, mosques, medreses, tombs, hamams, and houses) and ensembles (kulliyes and village) a significant stage in human history, by being the first capital and seat of the Ottoman Sultans, rulers of an Empire, covering Western Asia from Anatolia to Yemen, parts of Europe and North Africa, for hundreds of years. This history has left its important traces in the architecture and culture of all of these countries until our time.

     While individual architectural components in Bursa can be considered as outstanding examples of architectural type, this criterion is met through the ensembles, created by these components.

     Criterion (vi): The first Ottoman Sultans and their society were in the 14th century the leaders of the Moslem world, facing the declining historic centre of the big Eastern Christian society. Bursa, being their first capital, symbolizes more than any other place, the introduction of Moslem ideas, philosophy, architecture, literature, Eastern non-tangible traditions (not necessarily religious) to Europe and to the West.

     Creation of all state institutions in Bursa, meant the creation of the Nation, the State and later the Empire.


    The attributes embodying outstanding universal value are mostly present within the legally protected sites. The waqf system brought about a unique relation between kulliyes, commercial centre (Khans Area) and villages which constituted the urban layout of the city. All the components parts of the property have maintained their tangible and intangible values. 

    Buildings in the Khans Area, which developed around Emir Khan (a part of the Orhan Ghazi Kulliye) in the historical commercial axis, still preserve the integrity of their forms and materials, and also their original commercial functions at present. However, Pirinç Han and Kapan Han were partially harmed due to the construction of Hamidiye Street and Saray Street, respectively, during construction activities in the 19th century.

     Kulliyes, which are the most important component of the urbanization model applied consciously by the Ottomans, still exist at present, together with the neighbourhoods developed around them as a natural result of their public functions starting from the day of their establishment.

     Furthermore, Cumalıkızık village, with unique examples of civil architecture and its villagers who have attended to these buildings, has sustained its rural life.


    The Khans Area that incorporates the first kulliye in its core carries the tradesmen culture of the Ottoman era to date. In the meantime, it enables us to experience the Ottoman commercial district spatially, enriched with traditional rituals such as first sale of the day, bargaining, master-apprentice relations, and neighbourliness among tradesmen. The commercial axis of the Khans Area has been shaped based on the caravan route of the Ottoman era. According to the Suphi Bey map of Bursa (1862), which illustrated the oldest attainable urban texture, the majority of the mentioned buildings remain at present. The Khans in the area are two-storied, have square or rectangular plans with courtyards surrounded by units, and maintain their existence with these forms and plan properties. Such courtyard plan types have been effective for khans to sustain their commercial functions at present. As a result of the dynamic commercial life in the bazaars and markets, the Khans Area has always been the centre of the city. Reflecting the importance of this area as the centre of the city, the first Town Hall in Turkey was built in the 19th century on the land, where the madrasah and public kitchen of the Orhan Kulliye was once located. This building still keeps its municipal function.

     Kulliyes are still focal points meeting the social, cultural and religious needs of the inhabitants, parallel with their original public functions, and reflect the Ottoman characteristics of Bursa.

     What is more, the village of Cumalıkızık is still the same in terms of its residential pattern, agricultural fields and general setting. Cumalıkızık, which is one of the best preserved early Ottoman waqf villages, has maintained its authenticity, traditional life style and original land uses.

     Protection and Management requirements           

    All the component parts are protected under the provisions of the Law for the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage (the Act Numbered 2863). This is the main law related with preservation in Turkey. The buildings which were originally waqf property in core areas, are under the responsibility of the Regional Directorate of Foundations at present. All projects and applications to be conducted related to waqf property must be submitted to the Regional Directorate of Foundations for permission. In addition, 1/1000 scaled preservation plans are in place for all areas located within core areas. Projects and applications related with such buildings must obtain approval from Bursa Cultural Assets Regional Conservation Board.

     Protecting, preserving and utilizing the historical pattern effectively as a whole with its tangible and intangible values, and at the same time meeting the needs of change can only be possible by creating public awareness, in which all relevant and authorized people, institutions and bodies participate. With this purpose, Bursa and Cumalıkızık Management Plan was prepared benefiting from the knowledge and experience of all stakeholders in the sites.

     The management plan was prepared by Bursa Site Management Unit, which is an affiliate of Bursa Metropolitan Municipality, in accordance with the Supplement-2 of the Act Numbered 2863 (Regulation on Site Management). The Management Plan was approved by the Coordination and Supervision Board in a process strengthened with the contributions of the Advisory Board.

    Approved Management Plan plays an important role in directing the potential of the city in the right direction.

  4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to augmenting the monitoring indicators to allow for judgment of changes in state of conservation and requests the State Party to submit them to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2015.

Read more about the decision

Download Extract

The World Heritage Policy Compendium was elaborated thanks to the generous contribution of the Government of Australia.

The World Heritage Policy Compendium On-line tool was developed thanks to the generous contribution of the Government of Korea.

With the Support of