WH Committee, Report of the 17th Session, Cartagena 1993

You are viewing an archived web page, collected at the request of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) using Archive-It. This page was captured on 22:40:28 Dec 09, 2015, and is part of the UNESCO collection. The information on this web page may be out of date. See All versions of this archived page.

Distribution limited WHC-93/CONF.002/14 4 February 1994 Original: English/French UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE Seventeenth session (Cartagena, Colombia, 6-11 December 1993) REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Opening session and election of the new Bureau 1 Reports: The Secretariat 3 The Rapporteur of the Committee 6 Management of the World Heritage Centre 8 Monitoring Methodological aspects 12 State of conservation reports - Natural properties 15 - Cultural properties 21 Nominations - Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List 36 - Property inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger 44 Tentative lists 44 The World Heritage Fund and budget 45 Requests for International assistance 47 Operational Guidelines (revision) 51 Promotional activities 53 Cultural landscapes 55 Date and place of the eighteenth session and other questions 56 Closing session 58 ANNEXES I. List of Participants II. Agenda III. Address by Mr A. Badran, Deputy Director-General a.i. of UNESCO IV. Report on the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention since the sixteenth session of the World Heritage Committee V. World Heritage Committee Declaration on Bosnia VI. Report of the Expert Meeting on "Approaches to the Monitoring of World Heritage Properties: "Exploring ways and means", Cambridge, U.K. (1 to 4 November 1993) VII. Report of the International Expert Meeting on "Cultural Landscapes of Outstanding Universal Value", Templin, Germany (12 to 17 October 1993) VIII.Action Plan for the Future (Cultural Landscapes) I. INTRODUCTION I.1 The seventeenth ordinary session of the World Heritage Committee was held in Cartagena, Colombia, from 6 to 11 December 1993. It was attended by the following members of the Committee: Brazil, China (People's Republic of), Colombia, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Niger, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Spain, Thailand, and the United States of America. I.2 The following States Parties to the Convention who are not members of the Committee were represented by observers: Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Cuba, Czech Republic, El Salvador, Guinea, Holy See, Hungary, Nepal, New Zealand, Paraguay, Slovak Republic, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia and Venezuela. I.3 Representatives of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of the Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity. The complete list of participants is given in the Annex I. II. OPENING SESSION II.1 The outgoing Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Robert Milne, opened the session by thanking the authorities of Colombia, namely the Minister of Education of Colombia, Ms Maruja Pachon de Villamizar and Mr Juan Luis Mejia, Director-General of COLCULTURA, for inviting the Committee to convene its seventeenth session in Cartagena, Colombia. He then invited Ms M. Pachon de Villamizar to address the Committee and read the message of the President of Colombia, Mr Cesar Gaviria Trujillo. II.2 The Minister of Education of Colombia, Ms Maruja Pachon de Villamizar welcomed the delegates and participants and thanked the Committee for accepting the invitation of the Government of Colombia to hold its meeting in Cartagena. She read the message of President Cesar Gaviria Trujillo in which he underlines UNESCO's major role in awakening in all countries of the world the interest for the past and its preservation, for all that is unique and irreplaceable. Thanks to UNESCO's efforts linked particularly to the World Heritage Convention, memory, identity, heritage and environment have acquired broader significance that is being passed on to future generations. II.3 The Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO, Mr Adnan Badran, Deputy Director-General a.i. thanked the Government of Colombia for its generous offer to host this session, congratulated the representatives of the newly elected members of the Committee, namely the *[2] Delegates of Brazil, France, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Niger and the United States of America, and thanked the outgoing Chairman, Mr Robert Milne, for his endeavours to promote the World Heritage Convention. He then briefly presented the main results regarding World Heritage of the twenty- seventh session of the General Conference of UNESCO, held in Paris from 17 October to 16 November 1993. II.4 Referring to Resolution 3.1 adopted by the General Conference, Mr Badran informed the Committee that the Director-General of UNESCO has been invited (i) to promote the World Heritage Convention in the Member States of the Organization and the general public; to ensure systematic and continuous monitoring of the World Heritage sites; to identify action to ensure their conservation; and to mobilize the resources required for that purpose; (ii) to enhance preventive action in the Member States for the protection of cultural property and to facilitate prompt intervention in case of natural or human-made disasters; and (iii) to mobilize international support for safeguarding operations and to strengthen on-site training of conservation specialists. The General Conference underlined also the need to set up within UNESCO a specialized data bank and document service based on the information provided by systematic monitoring of the World Heritage sites and the need to develop innovative multimedia communication and education projects to increase public awareness and support. II.5 The Director-General of COLCULTURA, Mr Juan Luis Mejia, first underlined the importance of the World Heritage Committee's mission, saying that its task was to protect humankind from its own improverishment through the destruction of its oldest natural and cultural wealth. In his quest for progress, man has confronted nature and has transformed it to his own image. His relation to nature has been one of destruction rather than cohabitation. Now, however, in the spirit of the World Heritage Convention, we are trying to remedy this situation, and are searching for a more harmonious relation between humankind and its environment. II.6 Recalling that Colombia adhered to the World Heritage Convention in 1983, Mr Mejia noted that Colombia has established a series of mechanisms to preserve its cultural and natural heritage. This policy is reflected in the 1991 Constitution, particularly in a number of articles which Mr Mejia elaborated further in his statement. III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA III.1 The Delegate of the United States of America proposed that a new item be added on the revised provisional agenda, immediately after the Report of the Rapporteur, which would be 'Management and staffing of the World Heritage Centre'. Following this motion, seconded by *[3] Delegates of Germany and Thailand, the Committee adopted the revised agenda as amended. IV. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON, RAPPORTEUR AND VICE- CHAIRPERSONS IV.1 Ms Olga Pizano (Colombia) was elected Chairperson of the Committee by acclamation. Mr D. José Guirao Cabrera (Spain) was elected Rapporteur, also by acclamation, and the following members of the Committee were elected as Vice-Chairpersons: China, Oman, Senegal, Thailand and the United States of America. V. REPORT ON ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY THE SECRETARIAT SINCE THE SIXTEENTH SESSION V.1 Mr Bernd von Droste, Director of the World Heritage Centre and Secretary of the Committee, congratulated the Chairperson, the Rapporteur and the Vice- Chairpersons on their election and thanked the outgoing Chairperson and Bureau members for their excellent work. He then reported on the activities undertaken since the sixteenth session of the Committee. V.2 Having pointed out that there are presently 136 States Parties to the Convention, he first reminded the Committee of the appeal launched by the General Assembly at its ninth session on 29 and 30 October 1993 for the preservation of World Heritage sites endangered by war and civil conflict, urging all States Parties to reinforce public awareness through education and the mass media. Currently, there are 378 properties on the World Heritage List, of which 276 are inscribed as cultural sites, 87 as natural and 15 as mixed sites. These are situated in 86 States Parties. As more than 70 monitoring reports carried out in the past twelve months show, most of these sites face serious problems of conservation. V.3 Having referred to the Santa Fe session of the World Heritage Committee as a milestone in its work, as it marked the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the World Heritage Convention, Mr von Droste then reported on the main accomplishments of the past twelve months, outlining them on the basis of the five strategic goals of the Strategic Orientations adopted by the Committee in Santa Fe. V.4 Speaking of Goals 1 and 2 (completion of the identification of the World Heritage and ensuring the representativity of the World Heritage List), he informed the Committee that ICOMOS organized in July 1993 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, an expert meeting to prepare a methodological framework for a global study on the World Heritage List and thematic studies of the different types *[4] of cultural properties which could be proposed for inscription, including those that are poorly represented or, in some cases, not represented at all. ICOMOS also carried out two parallel thematic studies, one on the industrial heritage and the other on twentieth-century architecture. It should be pointed out, however, that in spite of these efforts, there is as yet no concensus in the scientific community on this matter. V.5 As regards the tentative lists, as basic instruments to evaluate the "outstanding universal value" of each property nominated on the List, Mr von Droste informed the Committee of the results of an analysis made by the World Heritage Centre, which shows that of the 136 States Parties to the Convention, only 60 (44%) have presented tentative lists. Of these, only 31 (23%) provide the information as requested by the Operational Guidelines. As for the representativity of the World Heritage List (Goal 2), he informed the Committee of the conclusions of the expert meeting on the question of cultural landscapes which took place in Templin (Germany) in Autumn 1993. The meeting concluded that the revised cultural criteria for including cultural landscapes on the World Heritage List are applicable. V.6 Referring to Goal 3 (to promote adequate protection and management of the World Heritage sites), Mr von Droste mentioned Angkor and Mount Nimba as examples of the operational safeguarding work done by UNESCO in the past year. He also reported on the findings of the mission sent to the Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia); the remedial efforts to improve the waterflow in the Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria) and the IUCN mission to Sangay (Ecuador), the results of which would be presented at this session. He furthermore reported on the regional training courses, supported under the World Heritage Fund, held in Tanzania, Cameroon, Costa Rica and Mali, a training workshop held in China and other training courses held in Saudi Arabia and Mali. Assistance for training in cultural heritage conservation was given for a ten-month interregional course for historic preservation held in Brazil, and for courses organized by ICCROM, such as the stone conservation course in Venice and other courses on mural paintings, architectural conservation and scientific principles of conservation. V.7 Mr von Droste informed the Committee that US$ 129,500 had been spent as emergency assistance for four cultural sites (Angkor, Dubrovnik, the Historic Centre of La Havana and Shibam) and two natural sites (Mount Nimba and Virunga National Park). Furthermore, the UNESCO General Conference, at its 27th session held in November 1993, underlined the need to create a flexible structure for emergency action which would allow rapid and effective safeguarding assistance in the event of natural or man-made disasters. Speaking of this, he pointed out the need to *[5] create closer links between monitoring programmes and international assistance programmes, as this would considerably improve the World Heritage Centre's performance. V.8 The Committee was also informed of the technical seminar on tourism in natural and mixed World Heritage properties, organized by the World Heritage Centre, jointly with UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) and in cooperation with the WTO (World Tourism Organization), held in Dakar, Senegal, from 22 to 27 November 1993. This was attended by managers of fourteen World Heritage sites from thirteen States Parties. The seminar dealt with six main issues: tourism and physical facilities, marketing and relationship with the tourism industry; visitor management; education and interpretation; planning; carrying capacity and monitoring. The participants agreed on the principles of tourist management and recommended that these be further examined by site managers on a regional basis. V.9 As requested by the Committee, the World Heritage Centre convened an expert meeting on the concept and framework for systematic monitoring of natural, cultural and mixed World Heritage sites, which corresponds to Goal 4 of the Strategic Orientations. Its main conclusion was that continuous monitoring of the state of conservation of a site is an integral part of the conservation and management process, and that the States Parties are responsible for its implementation. In order to initiate such a monitoring programme worldwide, Mr von Droste pointed out, the World Heritage Centre proposes to convene, in cooperation with the advisory bodies and UNESCO's Field Offices, regional and sub-regional meetings of World Heritage site managers. V.10 Mr von Droste also briefly outlined the promotional activities that had been carried out in the past twelve months (Goal 5), informing the Committee of the successful feedback which the World Heritage Centre received regarding The World Heritage Newsletter and the ongoing publishing and audiovisual projects such as the Independent Image film series of World Heritage sites, the Italian co-production of sixty video programmes on the World Heritage properties and the non-commercial video production by the Global Environmental Forum in Japan. In the future, he underlined, particular importance will be given to developing a high-quality data base on the Convention's structure and functioning and top quality mobile photo exhibits, on-site promotional activities and the development of educational materials to be used in schools and extra-curricula activities. V.11 Furthermore, he informed the Committee of the First General Assembly of the World Heritage Cities which took place in Fez, Morocco, from 6 to 8 September 1993, under the auspices of His Majesty King Hassan II and in the *[6] presence of the Director-General of UNESCO. The Assembly was attended by the representatives of 56 World Heritage cities and was preceded by a symposium on financing presentation operations in World Heritage cities and was also attended by representatives of UNDP, the World Bank, the African Development Bank, Habitat, ICOMOS and other international nongovernmental organizations. The next General Assembly will be held in Bergen, Norway, in the summer of 1995. V.12 Mr von Droste concluded his report with a brief review of the budgetary situation of the World Heritage Fund. He suggested to the Committee to allocate US$2,890,000 for the 1994 budget, and requested it to urge all States Parties to pay their dues in time. Furthermore, on the basis of Article 5.1 of the World Heritage Fund's financial regulations, he proposed the establishment of a Reserve Fund to be used for assistance requests linked to disasters and natural calamities. He also asked the Committee to consider changing the present annual budget to a two-year budget. V.13 Reminding the Committee of the World Heritage Centre's principal tasks, Mr von Droste informed the Committee of the rather critical staff situation of the Centre, thanked the four States Parties, namely Germany, Italy, Canada and the United States of America, for seconding three professional staff and invited other States Parties to help the Centre by seconding highly qualified personnel. VI. REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR OF THE SEVENTEENTH ORDINARY AND SEVENTEENTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSIONS OF THE BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE VI.1 Mr Azedine Beschaouch (Tunisia), former Rapporteur of the Committee, presented the report of the seventeenth ordinary and extraordinary sessions of the Bureau, the first held in Paris from 21 to 26 June 1993 and the second held in Cartagena on 4 and 5 December 1993. At the first meeting the Bureau discussed management and staffing of the World Heritage Centre and it examined the revised Operational Guidelines, taking into account the Strategic Orientations adopted by the Committee at its sixteenth session, including the proposals submitted by Italy and the United States of America. It furthermore discussed the methodological aspects of monitoring World Heritage properties and established an ad hoc working group comprising delegates from Brazil, China, Colombia, Germany, Tunisia and the United States of America, and the representatives of ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN and the UNDP/UNESCO Regional Project to propose the framework, objectives, agenda, tentative list of participants and a timeframe for the expert meeting which was subsequently held in Cambridge, United Kingdom, in November 1993. *[7] VI.2 Referring to the December 1993 meeting of the Bureau, Mr Beschaouch provided a brief summary of the recommendations of the Bureau regarding nominations. He informed the Committee that the Bureau, having examined those nominations which were referred back to the States Parties by the Bureau session of June 1993, recommended the inscription of one natural property (Shirakami-Sanchi, Japan), one mixed property (Reserva del Vizcaino, Mexico) which was divided into two nominations, one natural (Refugio de Ballenas en las Lagunas de El Vizcaino) and the other a cultural nomination (Pinturas rupestres de la Sierra de San Francisco, B.C.S.) and twelve cultural properties: Humayun's Tomb, Delhi; and Qutb Minar and its monuments, Delhi (India); the Jesuit Missions (Paraguay); the Baroque Churches (Philippines); Biertan, the Monastery of Horezu, and the Churches of Moldavia (Romania); Vlkolinec and Spissky Hrad (Slovak Republic); Coro and its Port (Venezuela); Hué (Vietnam) and the Historic Town of Zabid (Yemen). VI.3 The Bureau recommended to defer the nomination of the natural site St. Paul Subterranean National Park (Philippines); confirmed the earlier deferral of Jiddat al Harasis (Oman), and decided to defer the extension of the World Heritage site of the Old City of Dubrovnik (Croatia) until additional information is received from the State Party. Regarding two other properties for which nominations were referred back to the State Party or deferred in earlier years and for which additional information has been received, namely the Tongariro National Park (New Zealand) and Bamberg (Germany), the Bureau decided to defer the first nomination awaiting the outcome of an ICOMOS mission report of November 1993, while in the case of Bamberg, it decided to recommend to the Committee to inscribe the site, having received the requested additional information. VI.4 On both occasions, the Bureau also examined the requests for international assistance and proposals meant to improve the World Heritage accounting and budgeting. The Bureau decided to recommend to the Committee to adopt a biennial budget and to establish an Emergency Reserve of US$ 1.0 million in order to reduce the present surplus of the World Heritage Fund. Concluding this item, the Bureau expressed its appreciation of the documents and the budgetary transparency that they gave. VI.5 With regard to the nomination of Lumbini, Nepal, Mr Beschaouch recalled that the Bureau deferred this nomination at its session in June 1993. The Bureau decided to revise the text of its report of the seventeenth session (page 38 English version) as follows: "The Bureau recognized the very sacred character of this remarkable group of sites associated with the life of the Lord Buddha and considered that for this reason Lubini represented an important source, not only for Buddhism but also in more general terms for the cultural and spiritual history of *[8] humankind. However in view of the imperative need for this group of sites to be preserved and for its management to be assured in accordance with international standards, the Committee recommended that the inscription of this property on the World Heritage List should be deferred to allow the relevant agencies of the Kingdom of Nepal to take appropriate measures". VII. MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND STAFFING OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CENTRE VII.1 The Delegate of the United States of America expressed continuing concern regarding administration and staff shortage at the World Heritage Centre. Reminding the Committee that his country supported the creation of the World Heritage Centre from the beginning, and that it had seconded to it, jointly with Canada, a high-level professional whose mandate had been extended for another year, the Delegate of the United States proposed to the Committee to consider addressing to the Director-General of UNESCO a resolution urging him to: (i) strengthen the World Heritage Centre's staff at a level of approximately ten permanent professional posts with an appropriate balance of support staff posts; (ii) delegate authority to the Director of the World Heritage Centre to select appropriate personnel; (iii) maintain the full staffing complement for a sufficient period in order to demonstrate the full potential of the Centre; (iv) provide additional funds to the Centre from the Regular Programme and Budget for its operational requirements, (v) streamline administrative procedures for disbursements from the World Heritage Fund; and (vi) clarify the role of internal advisory committees, in order to avoid conflicting and duplicative mandates of the Centre, and to establish the World Heritage Committee as the authority for directing the Centre's annual workplan and responsibilities. The Delegate concluded his statement by suggesting that a group be created during this session to formulate a proposal which would be submitted to the Committee. VII.2 The Delegate from Germany congratulated the Director and the staff of the World Heritage Centre for its excellent work which is becoming ever more demanding due to the increasing success of the World Heritage Convention. He therefore expressed support for the statement made by the Representative of the United States of America. VII.3 The Delegate of Thailand reminded the Committee that his country had urged such action already in the past, emphasizing that adequate financial and human resources should be provided by UNESCO's Regular Programme. He therefore supported the proposal of the United States of America. *[9] VII.4 The Delegate of France, while expressing his satisfaction with the work of the World Heritage Centre, wished the Committee to consider what may be the consequences should the Centre become more autonomous. In his view three sets of issues needed to be examined: (i) procedural, such as the question concerning a possibly greater authority of the Centre's Director to recruit staff; (ii) structural, e.g. would it be appropriate to create a "satellite" network with decentralized World Heritage units in different parts of the world; and (iii) substantive, i.e. proposed changes could possibly lead to a divorce between the Centre's policy and that of UNESCO. VII.5 Replying to the debate, the Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO, Mr Adnan Badran, first pointed out that the creation of the World Heritage Centre as a semi-autonomous entity had been a rather bold step on UNESCO's part. The Steering Committee, he explained, was not meant to interfere with the Centre's work, but rather to mobilize the two UNESCO Sectors, which are its main partners within the Organization, to achieve jointly with the Centre, its goals, by pulling together financial and human resources. The Centre has presently six professional posts: two at Director level, one P.5, one P.4 and P.3 and one P.1/2. Another P.4 (for culture) and a professional post for administration will be added in the near future. In addition to this, the World Heritage Centre is expected to use UNESCO's Field Offices. Furthermore, the Centre's partners such as ICCROM, ICOMOS, the IUCN and others provide an important part of the services in implementing the Convention. UNESCO's present policy is to use consultants and NGO services for specific tasks rather than to increase the Organization's staff. Mr Badran concluded by saying that the Director-General is highly supportive of the Centre and that advice which the Committee decides to address to him on this matter will be welcome. VII.6 The Chairperson thereupon proposed the creation of a work group consisting of the new Bureau enlarged by the Delegates of France, Germany and Italy, which would report back to the Committee towards the end of this session. VII.7 The Delegate of Italy suggested that this group should discuss the future of the Centre in a more complex way, beyond the mere staff problems. This was supported by the Delegate of Germany, who suggested that the work group could define possible options as to how the World Heritage Centre should develop in the coming years. VII.8 Responding to these last interventions, Mr Badran agreed that the suggestions which the Committee may wish to address to the Director-General of UNESCO should foremost endeavour to define the functional autonomy of the Centre and how to use best existing structures. He reminded the Committee in this respect that UNESCO gives presently to *[10] the Centre its main facilities, which is an important contribution in kind. VII.9 The Committee discussed further the management and staffing of the World Heritage Centre after having taken note of the proposal prepared by the working group consisting of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Italy, Senegal, Thailand and the United States of America. Based on the conclusions of this working group, the Committee agreed on the importance of the World Heritage Centre as a unified body within the Secretariat of UNESCO. Furthermore, the Committee underlined that the determination of needs on staffing and funding levels can only be reached based on a clarification of the role and functions of the Centre. Having adopted the proposal of the Delegate of Colombia to delete the word "systematic" in the third point of item 1 (d), and to add "States Parties" in the same sentence so as to read: "coordination of monitoring of World Heritage sites carried out by the States Parties, the advisory bodies and other institutions, as requested by the Committee", the Chairperson declared the text of the working group adopted as amended by the proposal of Colombia. VII.10 The Committee requested the Chairperson to transmit to the Director-General of UNESCO the proposal as it now reads: "Based on the conclusions of the working group, consisting of China, Colombia, France, Germany, Italy, Senegal, thailand and the United States of America, the Committee agrees on the importance of the World Heritage Centre as a unified body within the Secretariat of UNESCO. The Committee believes that the determination of needs on staffing and funding levels can only be reached based on a clarification of the role and functions of the Centre. 1. The Committee believes the role and functions of the Centre are as follows. The Centre should: (a) fulfil the function of Secretariat to the organs of the 1972 Convention; (b) act as a clearing house for the purpose of coordination and information-sharing between the Committee and other conventions, programmes and international organizations related to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage, as requested by the Committee; (c) oversee the implementation of training, monitoring, and technical assistance by the States Parties, the intergovernmental body ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN and other NGOs, and cooperate with other units of UNESCO and its Field Offices, as requested by the Committee; *[11] (d) be the primary instrument for facilitating the implementation of the decisions of the Committee and in this regard should be the primary contact with the States Parties on all technical aspects of the Convention, including: (i) coordination of the inscription process; (ii) assistance to and coordination of requests by States Parties for training and technical assistance, including evaluation of the results; (iii) coordination of monitoring of the World Heritage sites carried out by the States Parties, the advisory bodies and other institutions, as requested by the Committee; (iv) organization of regular meetings and other meetings as requested by the Committee; (v) preparation of reports as directed by the Committee; (vi) development of draft proposals for technical guidelines to improve the effectiveness of the Convention as requested by the Committee; (vii) preparation of the budget for the Committee's approval; (viii) disbursement of funds in a timely manner. (e) implement plans and seek partnerships to increase materials promoting the Convention, as directed by the Committee and in accordance with the goals and policies of UNESCO. 2. Therefore, the Committee expresses its strong concern that every effort be made to secure funding and staff necessary to perform adequately the above tasks. The Committee requests the Director-General to take this concern into consideration for further action." VII.11 The Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO, thereupon made a statement emphasizing that with respect to the document presented by the working group, it had to be clearly stated that the Director-General of UNESCO is bound to abide strictly to the provisions of the 1972 Convention. Article 14, para. 1, of the Convention provides that "a Secretariat appointed by the Director- General of UNESCO" shall assist the Committee and that UNESCO will continue to do so. The Convention also provides in para. 2 of Article 14 that "the Director-General of UNESCO utilizing to the fullest extent possible the services of the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), in their respective areas of competence and capability, shall prepare the Committee's documentation and the agenda of its meetings and shall have the responsibility for the implementation of its decisions". Accordingly, he pointed out, the UNESCO Secretariat - of which the World Heritage *[12] Centre is a part - will work closely, as it had done in the past, with the intergovernmental organization ICCROM, the NGOs, such as IUCN, ICOMOS and others, in the implementation of the decisions of the Committee. In this regard, UNESCO is bound also to respect the directives issued and the decisions taken by the General Conference of UNESCO. Concluding his statement, Mr Bouchenaki underlined that the Director-General and the Secretariat of UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field, will make every effort - as they have done for World Heritage sites in the past - to harmonize contributions from various partners such as the UNDP, FIT, voluntary contributions, associate experts, and bilateral inputs. VII.12 Upon the proposal of the Delegate of Japan, the above statement of the Representative of the Director- General of UNESCO was to be included in the Final Report of the session. VIII. ELECTION OF A BUDGET SUB-COMMITTEE VIII.1 The Secretary of the Committee, Mr von Droste, first explained the rationale for setting-up a budget sub- committee, pointing out that its main tasks would be to (i) review the statement of the accounts; (ii) fix the budgetary ceiling; (iii) establish a reserve fund and (iv) allocate amounts to each budgetary line. Thereupon the Committee decided that the Sub-Committee would consist of the members of the previous and the new Bureau. It was asked to report to the Committee before the end of the session. (See Part XII of the Report.) IX. EXAMINATION OF METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF MONITORING OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF WORLD HERITAGE CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES IX.1 The Secretariat introduced the working document WHC-93/CONF.002/4 and recalled that the World Heritage Committee at its sixteenth session in Santa Fe requested the Centre to convene an expert meeting on the methodology of monitoring. The working document outlines the main conclusions of the expert meeting that was held at the World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, U.K., from 1 to 4 November 1993. The report of this meeting was made available to the Committee as information document WHC-93/CONF.2/INF.5. IX.2 The Secretariat emphasized that this document is a progress report reflecting the present state of achievement in a long process of defining the concept of monitoring. In this context, it was noted that three types of monitoring could be distinguished: *[13] - Systematic monitoring: the continuous process of monitoring the conditions of World Heritage sites with periodic reporting on its state of conservation. - Administrative monitoring: follow up actions by the World Heritage Centre to ensure the implementation of recommendations and decisions of the World Heritage Committee and Bureau at the time of inscription or at a later date. - Ad hoc monitoring: the reporting by the Centre, other sectors of UNESCO and the advisory bodies to the Bureau and the Committee on the state of conservation of specific World Heritage sites that are under threat. Ad hoc reports and impact studies are necessary each time exceptional circumstances occur or work is undertaken which may have an affect on the state of conservation of the sites. As regards systematic monitoring, the Secretariat emphasized that in the spirit of the Convention, it is the prime responsibility of the States Parties to put in place on-site monitoring arrangements as an integral component of day-to-day conservation and management of the sites. At the same time, however, it is considered essential that external and independent professional advisers are involved in a periodic reporting system. This reporting system should not only be addressed to site managers and national authorities, but should also lead to improved World Heritage assistance and decision-making. A regional or national approach is recommended for systematic monitoring so as to optimize its impact. For each of the national or regional programmes the most appropriate partners should be identified. The established monitoring framework should be reviewed and, if necessary, adapted to the particular conditions of the region. IX.3 Several delegates commended the results of the expert meeting and noted that it had elevated the thinking on monitoring considerably. However, it was emphasized in the discussions that the involvement of the States Parties is essential in further developing the concept of monitoring. In this respect, the Delegate of Italy underlined the importance which must be given to the carrying out of impact studies and ad hoc reports each time exceptional circumstances occur. It was also noted that, a monitoring methodology should on the one hand be applicable to all sites and should therefore have scientific rigour, while on the other, it should be sufficiently flexible so as to respond to regional and national characteristics, available technical expertise and their economic and cultural conditions and identities. *[14] IX.4 The Committee discussed the necessity to establish, at the time of inscription, comprehensive baseline information and that particular attention should be paid to the collection and management of data and documentation. The costs of implementing a baseline information collection should be estimated in advance, particularly for the developing countries. The Delegate of Colombia remarked that the establishment and operation of monitoring systems would require the development of comprehensive cooperation programmes. She therefore suggested that when developing a monitoring methodology, the cost estimate should take into consideration such programmes. Furthermore, the expert meetings should include participants from developing countries to help define feasible monitoring systems. IX.5 Following the discussion, the Committee invited the States Parties to put on-site monitoring arrangements in place as an integral part of site conservation and management, and to report to the Committee on the actions taken to implement this. IX.6 The Committee also endorsed the recommendations made by the Centre and asked it to form a small working group of experts from States Parties and the advisory bodies which would, on the basis of the observations made by the Committee, undertake the following actions: - establish guidelines for baseline information and its collection and management; - revise the nomination and evaluation procedures and process to secure baseline information at the time of inscription of sites on the World Heritage List; - establish a format for periodic reporting; - prepare a draft text on monitoring and its procedures for inclusion in the Operational Guidelines; - determine, jointly with ICCROM, ICOMOS, and IUCN, the need for training in monitoring; - estimate the costs to States Parties of the implementation of a systematic monitoring programme and look into possibilities of assistance to States Parties; - establish a small unit at the World Heritage Centre to oversee the implementation of a systematic monitoring and reporting system. IX.7 The Committee invited the Centre to report to the Bureau at its eighteenth session on the results of the above activities so that the Committee could take concrete and precise decisions on this matter. *[15] IX.8 The Secretary informed the Committee that parallel to the implementation of the above activities, regional monitoring activities would be promoted, such as the completion of the Latin American monitoring programme which should result in a regional state of conservation report in 1994. Furthermore, it is foreseen that regional seminars for site managers will also be held in 1994 in different regions. In this way, it is expected that the further development of the monitoring system will benefit directly from the practical implementation of monitoring programmes and will be firmly grounded in local and national experiences. X. MONITORING AND REPORTING OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES X.1 The Secretary introduced the documents prepared for the session: - WHC-93/CONF.002/5 and /5Add.1 "Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage cultural and natural properties" and WHC-93/CONF.002/5Add. "List of monitoring documents sent by States Parties to the World Heritage Centre". - Monitoring of the State of Conservation. Report prepared by IUCN, 1 December 1993. - Report on the State of Conservation of Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List, ICOMOS, November 1993. - Monitoring and follow-up 1991/1994 of World Heritage sites in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa of lusophone expression, Progress Report 1993 and Outlook. Prepared by the Regional Project for Cultural, Urban and Environmental Heritage, UNDP/UNESCO, December 1993. Natural Properties X.2 The Representative of IUCN presented a monitoring report and outlined the seven-step monitoring procedure of IUCN. He drew the attention of the Committee to the state of conservation reports on eleven sites, eight of which have been prepared with the assistance of IUCN field offices. Furthermore, the World Heritage Centre presented state of conservation reports on two sites, Mount Nimba (Guinea) and Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia) based on missions carried out by the Centre in May and September 1993. Sangay National Park (Ecuador) The Representative of IUCN recalled that the site was inscribed in 1983 and added to the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1992 due to threats from poachers, boundary encroachment and unplanned road construction. A field *[16] mission was conducted by IUCN's Office in Ecuador and the Committee discussed the proposed six-point action plan including the recommendation that an environmental impact assessment of the road construction be undertaken. The technical assistance request for Sangay National Park (US$ 28,500) will be reviewed in the light of the findings of the IUCN field review. The Centre is requested to transmit the Committee's concerns about the impact of the new road to the authorities in Ecuador. Tikal National Park (Guatemala) The Committee noted the prospects to expand the size of the site from 57,400 ha to 85,000 ha to include a substantial area of undisturbed natural forest and that a buffer zone project on agroforestry is being carried out with funding from Danish Government sources (DANIDA). The Centre is requested to send a letter to the authorities in Guatemala informing them of the opportunity which exists to apply for assistance for the preparation of a new nomination incorporating all the new elements of the site, both cultural and natural. Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) The Committee recalled that the site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its sixteenth session in 1992 due to threats caused by the encroachment of the Bodo tribe. No response had been received from the Government of India to several letters transmitting the Committee's previous requests for information since 1990. The Director of the World Heritage Centre informed the Committee furthermore, that a mission to India was undertaken by a staff member of the Centre to contact the authorities directly. The Committee had an extensive discussion on the action to be taken, including the possibility of delisting the site. Several delegates voiced their concerns about the failure of the Government of India to respond to the Committee's request. However, the present situation makes a site mission impossible. The Committee agreed to take further steps: (i) to request the Director- General of UNESCO to express, by letter to the Prime Minister of India, the Committee's concern; and ii) that other diplomatic channels be used to transmit the Committee's concerns about the continuing threats to Park values by the invasion of the Bodo tribe, as well as subsequent encroachments and poaching activities. Royal Chitwan National Park (Nepal) On the basis of a detailed report provided by the IUCN Office in Nepal, a state of conservation report on this site was presented. A number of threats were noted *[17] including poaching of the rhinoceros and tiger populations in the Park. It was further noted that the 1976 Management Plan does not address many of the current management issues and thus urgently requires updating. The new legislation providing for a buffer zone around the Park is, however, a commendable step and should be implemented as soon as possible. The Committee requested the Centre to contact the appropriate authorities to encourage them to continue the process underway with regard to the buffer zone concept and to begin the preparation of a new Management Plan. Air et Ténéré National Nature Reserve (Niger) The Committee recalled that the site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its session in 1992. The Committee noted that very little could be done until political negotiations are concluded. It was further noted that the Centre had sent condolences to the families of the reserve staff who were killed during the civil disturbances at the site. Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) The Representative of IUCN informed the Committee that the road project was almost completed and that the University of Dakar had finished an environmental assessment study on the impacts of the road construction. A donors' round table was held in June and has led to a project supported by the French Government for the future management of the Park. The Centre was requested to transmit the Committee's views to the appropriate authorities in Senegal and to be kept informed about the long-term effects of the improved road access on the Park. In the light of the fortieth anniversary of the Park in 1994, the Centre was asked to collaborate with the Park authorities in marking this event. Sinharaja Forest Reserve (Sri Lanka) The Committee recalled that this site is protected as a National Wilderness Area and had been listed on the World Heritage List since 1988. There are many incremental threats to the site, but the Committee noted that a Management Plan to address these had been completed. It was further noted that continued monitoring of the site should be implemented as a priority activity of the Plan. The Committee noted the contribution of the Government of Norway of US$ 600,000 over a four-year period for the implementation of the Plan. The Committee asked the Centre to congratulate the administrators for their efforts in completing a Management Plan for the site and to urge them to give close attention to monitoring encroachments. *[18] Ngorongoro Conservation Area (Tanzania) The Committee recalled that the site was removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1990 and noted the recommendations and discussion of the seventeenth session of the Bureau concerning uncontrolled cultivation in the conservation area. Technically, this cultivation is not permissible under the legislation for the area and much damage to natural values had been caused. The Director of the World Heritage Centre and the Director of the UNESCO Division of Physical Heritage provided information regarding the situation of the site's cultural heritage (Olduvai Gorge), and particularly regarding the serious threats to the footprints of early man. The Committee was informed that a project by the Getty Conservation Institute was underway to protect this priceless cultural heritage. The Committee discussed the possibility of including the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It was noted that the Government of Germany provided US$ 275,000 for the preparation of a new Management Plan for the site. Finally, the Committee requested the Centre to report back at the next session of its Bureau in 1994 regarding the protection of the cultural values of the site. The Centre should also transmit to the Government of Tanzania the Committee's serious concerns regarding the ongoing cultivation which threatens the natural values of this property. Virunga National Park (Zaire) IUCN reported on the difficult social and economic situation which is creating serious negative impacts on Virunga National Park. However, the emergency assistance project funded by the World Heritage Fund and carried out by WWF since its approval by the Bureau in June 1993, had positive effects for the protection of the site. The Committee discussed in detail the impact of listing the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger and IUCN confirmed that Virunga National Park would definitely be a candidate for this procedure. After considerable discussion and a vote, the Committee agreed to address a letter to the Zairois authorities underlining serious concern for the protection and management of the site, particularly the serious recurring encroachments, and suggesting to the Government of Zaire to consider preparing a technical assistance request. *[19] Victoria Falls National Park (Zimbabwe/Zambia) IUCN reported about the proposed construction of a dam (Batoka Gorge Hydro Power Scheme), which would not affect the Falls but would have a serious impact on the lower gorges, changing the character of the site from a turbulent river to a hydroelectric reservoir. The Committee was informed about an environmental impact assessment to which the IUCN Office in Harare was contributing technical assistance. The Committee requested the Centre to invite the authorities of both Zimbabwe and Zambia to activate the joint Victoria Falls World Heritage Management Committee in order to promote a coordinated approach to manage this transfrontier site. The Committee also asked to be kept informed of the possible dam project. Plitvice Lakes National Park (Croatia) The Centre informed the Committee that a mission was carried out in September 1993 in cooperation with IUCN to Plitvice Lakes National Park. The report noted the continuing cooperation of the authorities in the region as well as that of the United Nations Protection Forces (UNPROFOR). The report underlined the current situation whereby the natural values of the Park are intact and essentially recovering. There was no evidence of new damage to the Park as a result of the ongoing war in the region. However, social tension had increased and the economic crisis deepened. The mission team was unable to visit the Korkaova Uvala virgin forest because of military mines on the access roads. The Committee took note of the report. Mount Nimba Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire) The Committee recalled that this site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its sixteenth session in 1992. In its presentation, IUCN continued to stress its concern over the long-term risks associated with potential mining operations adjacent to the World Heritage site. It further noted the growing population pressure in the region. Recalling that a comprehensive report had been submitted to the Bureau in June 1993, the Secretariat highlighted several developments which occurred since the mission in May 1993. A corrected and revised boundary proposal had been submitted by the Government of Guinea in late November 1993. The boundaries correspond to those recommended by the mission and incorporate an area of 17,749 ha. Furthermore, a draft legislation was received in late November 1993 concerning the establishment of an Environmental Conservation Centre to be located on the site in order to coordinate conservation and protection measures in the region. *[20] An additional technical assistance request for US$ 45,000 for the continuing implementation of the mission recommendations relating to the conservation and protection of the site was received. The Committee concurred with findings of the report and took note of the technical assistance request. Everglades National Park (United States of America) The Committee recalled that the damage caused to the site by Hurricane Andrew on 24 August 1992 was discussed at the sixteenth session of the Committee. Further discussion on the ecological impacts took place at the seventeenth session of the Bureau. IUCN reported that it had not been able to carry out a site mission. The United States Delegation informed the Committee that the Superintendent of the Everglades National Park was present and that he would be pleased to present a report. The Superintendent indicated that a significant number of threats to the Park have existed since the time of its listing in 1979. These are still present, including alterations to the hydrological regime as well as impacts from adjacent urban growth. Several new threats, both man- made and natural, have aggravated conditions since the initial listing. These include increased nutrient pollution from agricultural activities, reduced water levels from flood control operations and mercury contamination of fish and wildlife. In addition, there had been a dramatic ecological deterioration of Florida Bay, as well as the severe effects of Hurricane Andrew. In response to these conditions, substantial Government actions have been initiated in recent years. Legal actions and negotiations to resolve nutrient pollution are very close to a successful conclusion. An addition of 107,000 acres to protect the north-eastern part of the Park has been incorporated. Structural changes in the water management regime to restore the water level in the north-eastern addition are underway. Experiments are being carried out with respect to optimum water deliveries. The Government provided 4.5 million US$ for monitoring and research, as well as a significant increase in other management funding. A major new emphasis and commitment has also been undertaken to accomplish long-term restoration through ecosystem management of the entire south Florida system. This brought all appropriate federal agencies together in a collaborative effort which should shortly include state and local governments. In conclusion, the report stated that the outcome of these efforts was by no means certain, however the outlook was hopeful. At the request of the Chair, IUCN underlined its agreement with the report given and suggested that the Everglades National Park should be a candidate for the List of World Heritage in Danger. *[21] After considerable discussion, the Committee agreed to include the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger and asked the Centre to communicate with the appropriate authorities. The Committee recognized the extensive research and other work underway to alleviate the threats to the Everglades National Park. It therefore congratulated the Government of the United States of America on the new initiatives it had taken and encouraged it to continue its efforts to restore the ecological balance of the Everglade ecosystem. IUCN was invited to monitor and assess the results of the restorative efforts. Cultural Properties X.3 State of conservation reports on cultural heritage were presented by the Secretariat, ICOMOS and the Regional Project for the Cultural, Urban and Environmental Heritage of UNDP/UNESCO. X.4 The Director of the Regional Project UNDP/UNESCO introduced the methodology applied in the monitoring programme for Latin America, the Caribbean and Lusophone Africa, highlighting the continuous revision of the methodology in consultation with the consultants involved in the monitoring programme and on the basis of the earlier monitoring experiences and feedback from the States Parties. The progress report presented to the Committee includes follow-up to the monitoring undertaken in 1991 (Antigua Guatemala, Ouro Preto, Cartagena, Machu Picchu, San Francisco de Lima and Quito) and 1992 (Salvador de Bahia, Portobelo/San Lorenzo, San Juan de Puerto Rico, Olinda and Tikal). The progress report also includes the full monitoring reports on the 15 sites that were monitored in 1993. Recommendations for each of the sites were presented in the monitoring report, the most salient of which are the following: Antigua Guatemala, Guatemala A comprehensive plan for the integral conservation and rehabilitation of the city should be prepared, particularly in relation to traffic flow, tourism and housing. Such a plan should lead to projects for urban rehabilitation and tourism development. A further concern is the state of conservation of the numerous ruins in the city that are in danger of collapse in the event of an earthquake. Historic Town of Ouro Preto, Brazil Important measures were taken by the municipal authorities to improve the traffic flow in the city and extensive work has been done to shore-up the hill slopes around the city. National and international tourism creates certain problems *[22] and an integral rehabilitation plan would have to be developed so as to improve the effects of tourism. Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena, Colombia World Heritage assistance has led to the preparation of a municipal legislation for the historical centre. Further assistance was approved by the Bureau for the preparation of a Master Plan for the centre in relation to an overall urban development plan. The Committee was informed of the plans to construct a new bridge, the Heredia Bridge, between the town and Fort San Felipe, just outside the ramparts of the city. This bridge would seriously affect the visual aspect of the site and would disrupt the visual and functional relation between the Fort and the town. The Committee recommended that the local and national authorities study carefully the traffic situation in and around the historical centre, and to consider possible alternatives for the bridge. Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, Peru As part of the assistance provided by the World Heritage Fund, an international archaeological seminar was held in September 1993 with the participation of national and international experts and bilateral cooperating agencies. The seminar concluded that coordination should be improved among institutions dealing with the Park's management, that an inventory of the cultural and natural resources should be pursued and that archaeological research and conservation actions should be redefined. The preparation of an operational plan for the Park should be of the highest priority. San Francisco de Lima, Peru Restoration of this convent, now forming part of the site of the Historical Centre of Lima, continues with the support of national agencies and bilateral cooperation. Improvement of the environment of the convent will be undertaken in the context of a major rehabilitation plan for the Historical Centre of Lima. City of Quito, Ecuador A master plan for the historical centre is in preparation and numerous restoration works have been undertaken over the past years. Advice on the structural reinforcement of some of the churches will be provided in 1994 with the financial support of the World Heritage Fund. Restricted financial resources, however, have slowed down the restoration programme. *[23] Salvador de Bahia, Brazil Major works are in progress for the restoration and renewal of the historic city, particularly the Pelourinho area. The new functions of this area and the relocation of its inhabitants is of great concern. Involvement of the cultural heritage and planning institutions is required. With World Heritage support, an international team of experts, together with local and regional authorities, will look into this matter in early 1994. Portobelo-San Lorenzo, Panama The state of conservation of the site had beens studied by an expert mission in 1993. The mission concluded that the Fortress of San Lorenzo was in an acceptable state of conservation, although stone conservation requires some special attention. The city of Portobelo is under pressure from increased population and deficient infrastructure. An action plan was drawn up for the execution of the necessary archaeological survey before construction works are undertaken in the town. Underwater excavations should not be considered as a priority. La Fortaleza and San Juan Historic Site, Puerto Rico, United States of America Conservation operations in San Juan are of high quality and well carried out in collaboration with the Park Service. No specific problem areas were identified. Historic Centre of the Town of Olinda, Brazil Olinda has been included in a major IDB-funded tourism development project for the north-east of Brazil. Management and conservation of the cultural heritage resources in the context of the urban cultural and tourism development in Olinda should therefore require special attention. Tikal National Park, Guatemala A well structured management plan for the Park as a whole was required. Stone and stucco conservation was of concern and the creation of an in-situ stone conservation laboratory should be considered. Sub-regional cooperation with other archaeological sites (e.g. Copan) should be promoted. *[24] City of Potosi, Bolivia Sanitation of the river La Ribera was considered a priority as this affects both the historic fabric and the health of the population. Furthermore, special attention is required for the restoration and upgrading of the housing stock and the archaeological industrial heritage. The capacity of the municipality to enforce protective legislation should be increased. World Heritage assistance for the conservation of recently discovered mural paintings in La Merced should be considered. Implementation of such assistance could be facilitated through already existing training facilities. Historic City of Sucre, Bolivia The City of Sucre was judged as relatively well preserved and the awareness of the city's values well developed. The development plan for Sucre would, however, need to reinforce aspects of cultural heritage preservation. City of Cusco, Peru Major urban rehabilitation projects were underway. The designs for the Plaza de Armas and the archaeological area around Qoricancha has to be carried out by specialists of the highest level and discussed thoroughly with the local and the scientific and professional communities. Institutional cooperation between the municipality and the Institute for Culture would have to be improved, particularly in relation to the Qoricancha project. Colonial City of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic A Master Plan for the Colonial City had been prepared reflecting an integral view on conservation including social and urban issues. This plan has to be adopted and implemented, and special attention has to be given to housing rehabilitation. The tourism development programme 'Cuna de America' is intended to stimulate cultural tourism whilst controlling its negative side effects. Old Havana and its Fortifications, Cuba In spite of a very well developed institutional structure, conservation efforts are seriously hindered under the present conditions in Cuba. A severe hurricaine struck Cuba in March 1993 causing serious damage to the site. Emergency assistance was underway for the restoration of the buildings surrounding the La Plaza Vieja. The monitoring mission recommended that World Heritage assistance be given to housing rehabilitation. The Committee commended the efforts of the State Party to safeguard the city and the *[25] important role on the national and regional level of the National Conservation Centre. Trinidad and the Valley de los Ingenios, Cuba It was reported that the town of Trinidad is generally well conserved, although shortage of specific building materials caused some problems. It is advisable to plan restoration of archaeological and architectural sites within a global plan, which would also take into account tourism development as well as proposed hydraulic projects. Brasilia, Brazil The protected zone of Brasilia named "El Poligono" was deemed well preserved in spite of considerable population growth. Conservation interests and urban development have to be fully integrated. The Committee was informed that Brazil intends to organize and host an international forum on the conservation of this 35-year old city. The Committee welcomed this important and appropriate initiative. Island of Mozambique, Mozambique A detailed programme for the recuperation of the island of Mozambique had been prepared by the national authorities, including aspects such as infrastructure, social, economic and cultural development, tourism, housing, education and archaeology. International and bilateral cooperation was being sought for the implementation of the recuperation plan and it was recommended to organize a donor conference. Maya Site of Copan, Honduras Studies and works in Copan are generally conducted according to high scientific standards. Special attention should be paid to the conservation of stone and stuccos. The original sculptures will be placed in a site museum and the replicas on the original sites. It is recommended to redefine the boundaries of the "Copan Archaeological Park" and to prepare an extension of the site. Furthermore, the management plan for the site should be updated. Chan Chan Archaeological Zone, Peru Conservation and maintainance of this very extensive archaeological site requires continuous efforts. Continued research on conservation techniques for adobe structures is necessary. An interregional training course on adobe conservation was in preparation between ICCROM, CRAterre, and the Regional Project. The issue of invasions and land *[26] occupation by farmers needs to be addressed immediately in order to rapidly and permanently reclaim and secure the site's intangible zone. Chavin (Archaeological Site), Peru Due to the remoteness of this site and the lack of sufficient human and financial resources, it required major technical cooperation. The site is subject to ongoing deterioration that could only be reversed by integral site management. Emergency assistance is required for cleaning and maintaining the site and treatment of the stone reliefs. Sanctuary of Bom Jesus do Congonhas, Brazil In general, the ensemble of Bom Jesus do Congonhas had been well preserved. However, architecture of mediocre quality has a negative affect on the surroundings of the site. Furthermore, regarding the physical state of conservation, specific problems were identified in parts of the woodwork in the main ship of the church and the mural paintings inside the chapel. Measures have to be taken to improve this situation. Jesuit Missions of Guaranis, Argentina/Brazil The Missions of Guaranis are nowadays used for tourist purposes and research. They are located in an aggressive natural environment. The successful restoration of the Missions on Brazilian territory was almost completed. Regarding the Argentina missions, restoration activities have focused on one mission, San Ignacio Mini. A more global approach was recommended as well as increased sub- regional cooperation. The Brazilian Delegation informed the Committee that steps towards such cooperation were already being taken by the countries of MERCOSUR (Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay). Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos, Bolivia While in the beginning of the twentieth century emphazis was laid on reconstruction, in later years attention gradually shifted to the restoration of authentic elements. Because the missions are located within villages, modernization constitutes a permanent threat to the site. Legal protection had therefore to be strengthened. National Historic Park - Citadelle, Sans Souci, Ramiers, Haiti A major ISPAN/UNDP/UNESCO project considerably contributed to the preservation and enhancement of the site and *[27] training of local personnel. The present economic and social situation has caused a serious decline in funding. But minimum and regular maintenance is being ensured by the national institute, ISPAN. Legal protection and management should be improved. Consolidation of the Sans Souci Palace and the rehabilitation of the Royal Gardens is required. The Committee commended the Regional Project for the pioneer role in setting up this regional monitoring programme and the involvement of regional structures and experts. Several delegates expressed their interest in similar programmes being initiated in other regions, particularly Africa and Asia, drawing upon the experiences in Latin America. The Committee took note that the regional monitoring programme would be concluded in 1994 with the publication of a regional state of conservation report. X.5 The Secretariat informed the Committee on the state of conservation of the following sites: Delphi, Greece In response to recommendations made by the Bureau in June 1993, the Greek authorities informed that no permission had been granted for the construction of an olive packing unit within the protection Zone A. Samos, Greece The Greek authorities informed the Bureau at its seventeenth session that a road project would be undertaken under the supervision of the Ministry of Culture and that this project would not endanger the site nor the Eupalinos Tunnel. The Central Archaeological Council recently informed the Centre that the proposed road project has been rejected. The municipality was therefore studying alternative solutions that would not affect the protected area. Historic Centre of Puebla, Mexico The Secretariat informed the Committee that several letters had been received on a tourism development project that would imply the demolition of historic buildings. The Delegate of Mexico informed the Committee that a decree had been published in the Official Journal of Puebla on 13 August 1993 for the elaboration of an Urban Development Plan, and not a Tourist Development Plan, for a specific sector of the town, and that this was an urban instrument defined by the General Law for Human Settlements, according to standards set by the Ministry of Social Development (SEDESOL). *[28] This partial plan comprised the establishment of a project which was being elaborated by the Municipality of Puebla and which would be presented for discussion and eventual adoption during the first half of 1994, according to a report in the local press. Therefore, according to the Delegate, it was not possible to discuss a project which does not yet exist, as there have been proposals and counter proposals and these would be evaluated in 1994. Furthermore, with regard to the monitoring of sites, the Mexican authorities presented in October 1992 a report on the six first sites inscribed on the World Heritage List, amongst which was Puebla. In order to update and complete this report, a second report was to be presented, not only on these six properties but on the ten properties already inscribed. This work is expected to be completed in 1994 and would be presented to the Bureau session in July. Old Town of Avila, Spain In October 1993 the Centre was informed of a project to construct a new bridge over the river Rio Adajo just outside the historic walls of the city and close to the Roman bridge. ICOMOS reported that the bridge would directly affect the view on the city. The Spanish Delegation informed the Committee that complementary information from the municipal authorities was expected and that as soon as this was available, the Centre would receive a report in this respect. The Committee expressed its concern on this matter and requested the Centre to inform the municipal authorities, and ask them to study other possibilities of solving the traffic flow. Burgos Cathedral, Spain The Committee took note of the information received from the national and local authorities, that confirm the creation of an Advisory Council for the Cathedral with the participation of the Ministry of Culture, regional and local authorities, the university and others. This Council established a Master Plan for the Cathedral in which priorities were defined for all restoration works and other interventions. Hadrian's Wall, United Kingdom The Committee expressed its concern regarding the project for a trail on top of Hadrian's Wall which would affect the archaeological values of the site and requested the Centre to inform the United Kingdom authorities accordingly. *[29] X.6 Several delegates informed the Committee on the situation in specific World Heritage sites in their countries. Hanseatic City of Lubeck, Germany The Delegate of Germany informed the Committee that the invitation to ICOMOS to visit the Hanseatic City of Lubeck had been postponed until after the upcoming municipal elections. Bahla Fort, Oman The Delegate of Oman informed the Committee that the authorities were studying the necessary restoration works of the Bahla Fort and that a report would be presented to the Centre as soon as possible. Santa Maria Maggiore/San Giovanni Laterano, Holy See The Observer of the Holy See informed the Committee that over the last years extensive conservation work has been carried out in the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore. The Observer also gave details of a terrorist attack which damaged the Basilique of San Giovanni Laterano. The Committee expressed its concern about the cultural heritage being the object of terrorist actions and transmitted its sympathy to the Vatican authorities. Pueblo de Taos, United States of America The Committee recalled that ICOMOS reported to the Bureau at its seventeenth session on the state of conservation of Pueblo de Taos. The Committee took note of the information received from the Governor of Pueblo de Taos and expressed its concern about threats to the site and local traditions, particularly the proposed extension of Taos Airport. The Committee requested the Centre to communicate these concerns to the Government of the United States, asking for detailed information on the conservation and management of the site. Kasbah of Algiers, Algeria The outgoing Rapporteur presented to the Committee the main content of the report prepared by the Algerian authorities, and informed that legislative measures and urban enhancement were already underway or in preparation for the safeguard and rehabilitation of the Kasbah of Algiers. *[30] This report was transmitted to ICOMOS for evaluation and monitoring. Auschwitz Concentration Camp, Poland Following remarks made by the Observer of Tunisia, the Committee recommended that the Centre examines the integrity of this property inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1979 and informs the next session of the Bureau. X.7 The Director of the Division of Physical Heritage presented to the members of the Committee progress reports concerning various on-going operational projects for World Heritage properties. Angkor, Cambodia A new Government had been constituted and was actively pursuing cooperation with their partners of the international community towards national reconstruction and development. The UNESCO Secretariat has made every effort to assist the new government in meeting the commitments which the Head of State, His Majesty Norodom Sihanouk, had made at the time of inscription of Angkor on the List of World Heritage in Danger. On the first recommendation set out by the Committee at the time of inscription: enactment of adequate protective legislation, the following had been achieved: 1. the new Cambodian Constitution has specific articles (Articles 69, 70, 71) making the protection of national cultural heritage a duty of the State, and declaring designated national and World Heritage sites to be combat- free zones; 2. the cultural property protection laws, prepared with the technical assistance of UNESCO which were adopted as Decisions of the Supreme National Council of Cambodia on 10 February 1993, were expected to be presented to the National Assembly in the near future for review and official legislation; 3. in November 1993 the Ministry of Environment issued the "Decree on the Creation and Designation of Protected Areas", thereby establishing a national system of protected areas. This Decree was expected to be presented to the National Assembly for consideration and eventual enactment as law. UNESCO and the IUCN Representatives in Cambodia were assisting the authorities concerned in refining the text to take into consideration the protection of cultural landscapes which are particularly relevant in the context of large cultural sites in Cambodia, such as Angkor. *[31] As regards the second recommendation of the Committee, namely the establishment of a national protection agency, the new government had officially informed UNESCO that the NHPAC Statutes, as adopted by the Supreme National Council of Cambodia (SNC) on 10 February 1993, would be amended to reflect the new situation of Cambodia and to serve as the basis of establishing an adequate national protection agency. Under the chairmanship of the Minister of State in charge of Cultural Affairs, the Royal Government of Cambodia had provisionally established an inter-ministerial Supreme Council of National Culture to resolve day-to-day matters and to define the mandate and authority of the appropriate national protection agency to be established. As regards the third and fourth recommendations of the Committee, namely the establishment of permanent boundaries and of meaningful buffer zones, as the report to the June Bureau session indicated, UNESCO and the Cambodian authorities have been executing a project entitled the ZEMP "Zoning and Environmental Management Plan" financed by UNDP, the Government of Sweden and others. The ZEMP project team, composed of 25 international experts and Cambodian counterparts, completed the draft plan in September which was being reviewed by the new government. A review of ZEMP was held in Phnom Penh at the end of November and attended by the project team, Ministers and donors. Mr Bouchenaki also informed the Committee of the recent establishment of an Intergovernmental Committee for the safeguarding and development of Angkor as decided by the Tokyo Conference (12 and 13 October 1993). The primary purpose of this Phnom Penh-based Intergovernmental Committee, whose secretariat would be provided by UNESCO, is to assist the Cambodian Government in defining conservation priorities and to promote and coordinate international assistance for Angkor. The World Heritage Committee supported the appeal of the Director-General of UNESCO to the international community to re-dynamise cooperation with the Kingdom of Cambodia for safeguarding Angkor. In addition to the information provided by the Secretariat, Mr Beschaouch was requested to present the outcome of his mission to Cambodia, as special representative of the Director-General. He informed the Committee about his contacts with the highest authorities in Cambodia and confirmed their willingness to pursue and reinforce the cooperation with UNESCO for the safeguarding of the sites of Angkor. Following this presentation, the Committee expressed its satisfaction with the progress made in the political normalization and national reconciliation *[32] process, following the promulgation of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia. Furthermore, the Committee applauded the activities carried out by UNESCO in cooperation with the Cambodian authorities to establish a legal, procedural, technical and administrative framework for the integrated safeguarding of the site of Angkor and its ensemble. The Committee noted also with satisfaction the new perspectives resulting from the intergovernmental Tokyo Conference to mobilize international assistance for the safeguarding of Angkor. Following these reports, the Committee recommended: 1. that the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia finalizes, with UNESCO's assistance, the elaboration of an emergency safeguarding scheme in the framework of a regional management and development plan. This plan should include cultural and ecological dimensions of the historical perimeter as well as adequate conservation measures; 2. that UNESCO, which ensures the Secretariat of the "International Coordination Committee", envisages sending to the World Heritage Committee a periodic report on the development of international action for Angkor; 3. that ICOMOS and ICCROM may assist the Cambodian authorities in the elaboration of a long-term management and monitoring programme in Angkor, including the specific training of various indispensable personnel. The Old City of Dubrovnik (Croatia) The Secretariat recalled action undertaken by UNESCO in cooperation with Croatian specialists, and indicated that the brochures prepared jointly with national authorities proved to be an excellent promotional support. A number of safeguarding measures were taken: - a restoration methodology was defined; - training courses were organized in France and Italy for Croatian architects; - equipment and materials were purchased for the restoration of roofs. These UNESCO activities, undertaken in liaison with the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments of Dubrovnik, the Institute for the Rehabilitation of Dubrovnik and the UNESCO National Commission, should be reinforced through support under the World Heritage Fund. At the request of the Committee at its sixteenth session, the Croatian authorities submitted a proposal for the extension of the World Heritage site. This was discussed by the Bureau at its seventeenth extraordinary session, and it was decided to defer this proposal until the Croatian *[33] authorities also submit, as requested, a proposal for a buffer zone. Saint Sophia, (Turkey) During the official visit of the Director-General of UNESCO to Turkey in April 1993, the Turkish authorities drew his attention to the deteriorating state of conservation of Saint Sophia. Subsequently, a mission financed by UNESCO took place to assess the state of conservation of Saint Sophia and concluded that the building was not seriously at risk. However, it was proposed to set up a system of control, especially with regard to all movement which could affect the structure of the building. The evaluation report of the mission would be made available to the Bureau. The Hermitage, St. Petersburg (Russian Federation) At the request of the authorities of the Russian Federation, the Director-General decided to launch a large- scale project for the rehabilitation of the Hermitage Museum. Two missions were organized in 1993 in which experts of the Kimbell Art Museum of Houston, and the Metropolitan Museum, New York, (USA) participated. Furthermore, UNESCO requested a consultant engineering firm in Edinburgh, (UK), to identify different components for a rehabilitation programme for the Hermitage Museum. This group of architects/engineers visited the site in September and November 1993 to prepare, together with Russian specialists, the rehabilitation programme for the buildings of the complex. A progress report would be submitted for information to the Bureau. Old Walled City of Shibam (Yemen) Referring to the torrential rains in spring 1993 which affected a number of houses of the Old City of Shibam, the Director of the Division of Cultural and Physical Heritage and the Delegate of Germany presented the slides made by a German film producer who had visited the site. Emphasizing the different threats being faced by Shibam, they both drew the attention of Committee members to the importance of emergency assistance to repair the sewerage network, the modernisation of traditional irrigation systems and maintenance work to make the terrasses of the 'tower-houses', which characterize this City, waterproof. X.8 The Representative of ICOMOS introduced the applied modus operandi for reporting and monitoring and presented the state of conservation report on the following sites: *[34] Kizhi Pogost, Russian Federation At the seventeenth session of the Bureau, ICOMOS informed about its involvement in the conservation efforts for Kizhi Pogost and that an expert mission would be undertaken to the site. The Bureau approved a technical assistance request to support this mission with funds provided under the Canadian Green Plan. The mission took place in summer 1993 and a full report was available. In collaboration with the Russian counterparts, the mission addressed issues such as legal protection, conservation management, fire protection, iconostasis conservation, documentation, and monitoring, history and authenticity, biological/chemical deterioration, structure and conservation philosophy and goals. Based on the findings of the mission, ICOMOS recommended that in 1994 high priority be given to finding means to support the following study and decision-making activities: - monitoring and documentation - completion of all required preliminary studies and reaching consensus on the conservation concept - completion of individual conservation studies and their consolidation within a comprehensive and integrated conservation plan. A major conservation project at the site could then start in 1995. The Committee commended ICOMOS for its excellent collaboration with the Russian authorities and experts and the collaboration provided by the Governments of Canada, Finland and Norway and the individual ICOMOS members who participated in the mission. The Committee endorsed the recommendations formulated by ICOMOS. St. Petersburg, Russian Federation ICOMOS reported to the Bureau at its seventeenth session on its review of factors related to the steady deterioration of the physical environment of the city. The Bureau supported the ICOMOS recommendation to explore ways and means to encourage exchange between the city's specialists and outside experts. An ICOMOS mission undertaken in June 1993 identified the following key problems: insufficient public resources, changing function of the city, housing and ecological problems, unplanned urban development, lack of appropriate management and heritage legislation, lack of adequate documentation and lack of public involvement. These problems, however, were very well understood by local authorities and experts. ICOMOS proposed to organize an evaluation workshop in St. Petersburg in June 1994 with the participation of about 25 Russian professionals or *[35] municipal planners and ten outside professionals from Central and Western Europe. ICOMOS had included funding support for this meeting in its budget for 1994. In response to a question from the Delegate of Thailand, the ICOMOS Representative underlined that the situation in St. Petersburg is critical, but that improvement could be expected. The Committee endorsed this proposal for an expert meeting. Santiago de Compostela, Spain At its seventeenth session, the Bureau discussed the problems posed by the construction of a sports hall in the World Heritage site. Severe concerns were transmitted to the Spanish authorities. Recently, an agreement has been reached between the municipal, regional and national authorities. ICOMOS evaluated the revised project and found it to be in harmony with its historic environment. The Committee expressed its satisfaction to the Spanish authorities for the action taken to maintain the integrity of the site. Kathmandu Valley, Nepal A joint UNESCO/ICOMOS mission was undertaken in November 1993 to evaluate current and past conservation activities to examine boundaries and to study the possibility of setting-up buffer zones, to verify the state of the listed the monuments, to assess the support capacities of the national and municipal authorities and to evaluate proposed amendments to the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act. The mission's conclusions stressed the continuing urgency of the situation and defined sixteen areas in which significant improvements should be made in order to maintain the integrity of the original inscription. The mission also suggested increased international support and a permanent UNESCO presence at the site. ICOMOS suggested that the Government of Nepal consider recommending to the Committee to place the Kathmandu Valley on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in order to increase international support, and that a follow-up mission be undertaken in a year's time in order to assess, in cooperation of the Nepalese authorities, the progress made in the sixteen areas of concern. The Observer from Nepal stated that his Government would seriously consider the recommendations made by the mission. In his opinion, threats to the site were not so severe that listing on the World Heritage in Danger List would be appropriate. Nepal was actively taking measures, notably for improved conservation, management and legal protection of the site, among others, and the state of conservation would improve in the near future. Nepal would appreciate *[36] receiving technical assistance from the Fund and ICOMOS to support its conservation efforts. The Committee concluded that the mission report should be studied in-depth and that the recommendations should be reviewed with the Nepalese authorities. The Committee requested the Centre to report on this matter to the Bureau at its next session. X.9 The ICOMOS Representative informed the Committee also of the involvement of ICOMOS in site specific or national monitoring efforts. Special mention was made of the monitoring of World Heritage sites in the United Kingdom that was commissioned by the authorities of UK- ICOMOS, and of joint monitoring missions to two sites in Norway undertaken by national experts, ICOM and ICCROM. X.10 The Committee expressed its appreciation for the positive actions taken by the States Parties in response to inquiries by the Secretariat and to recommendations and observations made by the Bureau and Committee. XI. NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST AND LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER XI.1 The Committee took note of the advice of the authorities of Australia that the matters raised by the Bureau at its seventeenth session regarding nomination 368bis of the extension of the Central Eastern Rainforests of Australia were in the process of being resolved, and that further advice would be provided to the Bureau at its next meeting. A. Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List Name of Identifi- State Party having Criteria Property cation No. submitted the nomination in accord- ance with the Convention Joya de Ceren 675 El Salvador C(iii)(iv) Ceren Archaeological Site The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (iii) and (iv), but noted the fragility of the remains and recommended that particular attention should be given to its conservation. *[37] Bamberg 624 Germany C(ii)(iv) The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). Maulbronn 546rev Germany C(ii)(iv) Monastery Complex The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). Humayun's 232 India C(ii)(iv) Tomb, Delhi The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). Qutb Minar 233 India C(iv) and its monu- ments, Delhi The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). Archaeological 659 Ireland C(i)(iii)(iv) ensemble of the Bend in the Boyne The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (i), (iii) and (iv) and invited the Irish authorities to control carefully future developments in and around the site and to involve ICOMOS in conservation and management planning. I Sassi di 670 Italy C(iii)(iv)(v) Matera The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iii), (iv) and (v). Himeji-jo 661 Japan C(i)(iv) The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (i) and (iv). *[38] Buddhist 660 Japan C(i)(ii)(iv)(vi) Monuments in the Horyu- ji area The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (i), (ii), (iv) and (vi). Yakushima 662 Japan N(ii)(iii) The Committee inscribed the site under criteria (ii) and (iii) noting in particular the sacred values of the ancient forests of Yakusugi and took note of the statement by the Japanese authorities that a coordinating committee for the site had been established. The Committee endorsed the suggestion in the IUCN report concerning follow-up measures. Shirakami- 663 Japan N(ii) Sanchi The Committee inscribed the site of the undisturbed pristine beech forest under criterion (ii) taking note that the Japanese authorities incorporated the original buffer zone in the site and a new map illustrating the revised boundaries. Progress on strengthening the legal basis and preparation of a management plan was also noted. The Committee noted the desirability of a follow-up mission to review progress in about three years. The Delegate of Japan thanked the Committee for its deliberations and confirmed that the Japanese authorities will do their utmost to ensure the protection of World Heritage sites. Whale 554bis Mexico N(iv) Sanctuary of El Vizcaino The Committee recognized the exceptional universal value of the site as a sanctuary for grey whales and other important species and inscribed it on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). The Committee noted that there is a need for significant improvement in the infrastructure required to manage the site as well as the need to enhance educational and promotional activities outlined in more detail in the IUCN Technical Evaluation. *[39] Historic 676 Mexico C(ii)(iv) Centre of Zacatecas The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). Rock Paintings 714 Mexico C(i)(iii) of the Sierra de San Francisco Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the original nomination of the mixed site of El Vizcaino was resubmitted as separate cultural and natural nominations. The Committee inscribed the cultural site of the Rock Paintings of the Sierra de San Francisco under criteria (i) and (iii). Tongariro 421rev New Zealand C(vi) National Park N(ii)(iii) The Committee recalled that this site was originally submitted as a mixed site. However, it was inscribed in 1990 under natural criteria (ii) and (iii) only. At the same time as the Committee revised the criteria for cultural heritage, it requested the New Zealand authorities to resubmit the nomination as a mixed site. The seventeenth extraordinary session of the Bureau reviewed the revised nomination and referred it to the Committee. ICOMOS informed the Committee of a mission to the site in late November 1993. The Committee discussed the matter in detail both from a procedural point of view as well as in regard to the application of criterion (vi). The Committee decided that the stipulation in the Operational Guidelines that criterion (vi) be only applied "in exceptional circumstances or in conjunction with other criteria" refers to either natural or cultural criteria. After careful consideration, the Committee decided to inscribe Tongariro National Park also under cultural criterion (vi). Jesuit Missions 648 Paraguay C(iv) of La Santísima Trinidad de Paraná and Jesús de Tavarangue The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). The Committee invited Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay to consider a joint inscription of the Jesuit missions on their territories. The Delegate of Brazil would welcome a joint conservation effort and announced that such an initiative was being taken in the context of MERCOSUR. *[40] Baroque 677 Philippines C(ii)(iv) Churches of the Philippines The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). Tubbataha 653 Philippines N(ii)(iii) Reef (iv) Marine Park The Committee inscribed Tubbataha Reef Marine Park under criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv) as one of the outstanding coral reefs in the region and encouraged the Philippine authorities to provide funds for the management of the site. The Delegate of the Philippines stated that they would do their utmost to ensure funding for the management of the site. Biertan and 596 Romania C(iv) its fortified Church The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). However, the Committee strongly recommended that the surrounding landscape should be adequately protected and invited the State Party to consider the extension of the buffer zone. Monastery of 597 Romania C(ii) Horezu The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (ii). Churches of 598 Romania C(i)(iv) Moldavia The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (i) and (iv), noting in particular the exceptional value of the external mural paintings. Architectural 657 Russian C(ii)(iv) ensemble of the Federation Trinity Sergius Lavra in Sergiev Posad The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv). *[41] Vlkolínec 522rev *[sic; should be 622rev] Slovak Republic C(iv)(v) The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iv) and (v). The Committee commended ICOMOS on the comparative study on "Traditional Villages in the Carpathian Basin and its immediate surroundings" which has been carried out in consultation with specialists from all the countries concerned. Spissky Hrad 620rev Slovak Republic C(iv) and its associated cultural monuments The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). Banská 618rev Slovak Republic C(iv)(v) Stiavnica The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iv) and (v). Archaeological 664 Spain C(iii)(iv) ensemble of Merida The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iii) and (iv). Royal Monas- 665 Spain C(iv)(vi) tery of Santa María de Guadalupe The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iv) and (vi). The Route of 669 Spain C(ii)(iv)(vi) Santiago de Compostela The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). In response to a suggestion made by the Bureau, the Delegate of Spain informed the Committee that Spain would like to maintain the already inscribed sites of Santiago de Compostela and Burgos Cathedral as separate properties on the World Heritage List in view of their individual and particular uniqueness. *[42] The Delegate of France informed the Committee that discussions were in progress between Spain and France on a joint inscription of the Route of Santiago on both territories. He welcomed the inscription of the Spanish part and announced that the complementary part in France would be nominated in due course. In this context, the Delegate from the United States stressed the importance of considering historic transportation corridors for inclusion in the World Heritage. Birka and 555 Sweden C(iii)(iv) Hovgården The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iii) and (iv). Engelsberg 556rev Sweden C(iv) Ironworks The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv). Coro and its 658 Venezuela C(iv)(v) Port The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (iv) and (v). The Delegate of Germany pointed out that a comparative study on colonial towns in Latin America would be appropriate to obtain a better insight in this matter. The Complex of 678 Vietnam C(iv) Hué Monuments The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criterion (iv), but decided that the inscription would only take effect upon receipt of a Tentative List for Vietnam. By letter of 9 December the Vietnamese authorities provided the requested Tentative List, thus this property was inscribed on the World Heritage List. Historic 611 Yemen C(ii)(iv)(vi) Town of Zabid The Committee inscribed the site on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). The Committee recommended the authorities to strengthen the conservation and management of the site in consultation with ICOMOS. *[43] XI.2 With reference to the nomination of The Historic Centre of Boukhara, (Uzbekistan) (602rev), the Committee noted that this property was presented by the former USSR and that it was included in its Tentative List. This Tentative List had not been reconfirmed by the Uzbekistan authorities with regard to cultural properties on its territory. Therefore, the Committee decided that inscription under criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi) would only take effect if and when the Tentative List is presented. B. Properties which the Committee did not inscribe on the World Heritage List Fossil 667 Hungary Findings of Ipolytarnoc The Committee recognized the importance of this site on a national level, however it did not meet criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List. Wild Ass 650 India Sanctuary The Committee was of the view that this site, although important at a national level, did not meet criteria for inclusion on the World Heritage List. Cedars of 646 Lebanon Lebanon The Committee recognized the sacred importance of the Cedars of Lebanon. However, the nominated site is too small to retain its integrity and therefore the Committee was of the view that it did not meet natural World Heritage criteria. The Delegate of Lebanon informed the Committee that steps were being undertaken for the preparation for a future nomination of a cultural landscape being considered for the Qadisha Valley, including one Grove of the Lebanese Cedars. Cuc-Phong 673 Vietnam National Park The Committee recognized the importance of the site as the first National Park in Vietnam. The site, however, does not meet the criteria of outstanding universal value under either natural or cultural criteria, and therefore was not recommended for inscription on the World Heritage List. During IUCN's field review of this site it was noted that other forest sites may fulfil the criteria and should be reviewed. *[44] C. Property inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger Everglades National Park, United States of America The Committee's considerations and recommendations regarding the state of conservation of this site are described in Chapter X.2 of this report. TENTATIVE LISTS XI.3 After having reviewed the nominations for inscription on the World Heritage List, the Committee reviewed Section I of the Document WHC-93/CONF.002/7. XI.4 The Committee took note of the considerations presented by the Secretariat on this issue and of the results of an analysis of the tentative lists that have been submitted by States Parties over the years. The Committee expressed its concern on the small number of tentative lists that meet the requirements as stipulated in the Operational Guidelines, paragraphs 7 and 8, and confirmed the importance of these lists for planning purposes, comparative analysis of nominations and for facilitating the undertaking of the global and thematic studies. XI.5 The Committee also confirmed that the tentative lists, which are mandatory for cultural properties and voluntary for natural ones, include those properties which the State Party intends to nominate for inscription on the World Heritage List during the coming five to ten years, and that these lists can be amended whenever the State Party concerned considers it opportune. The Committee will consider the necessity of a substantive evaluation of the tentative lists once a sufficient number has been received. XI.6 The Committee invited the States Parties which have not yet done so, to pursue the preparation of tentative lists according the the Operational Guidelines. The Committee took the following decisions and requested the Centre to ensure their implementation: - During the next two-year period the highest priority should be given to the establishment and/or revision of tentative lists in accordance with the stipulations in the Operational Guidelines, paragraphs 7 and 8. Active collaboration with the States Parties should be sought and preparatory assistance be provided when necessary and requested by the State Party concerned. - During this period nominations of cultural properties that are included in any of the tentative lists would be accepted and processed according to the Operational Guidelines. *[45] - As of 1 October 1995 only nominations of cultural properties that are included in tentative lists which meet all requirements as stipulated in the Operational Guidelines would be processed. - From 1994 onwards, the tentative lists that meet the requirements as stipulated in the Operational Guidelines would be published and presented as an information document to the Committee at its annual meetings. XII. SITUATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND, BUDGET FOR 1994 AND DRAFT BUDGET FOR 1995 XII.1 The Committee adopted the following budget for 1994 and took note of the indicative budget for 1995. Approved budget for 1994 and indicative budget for 1995 1994 1995 Items Approved Indicative US$ US$ ___________________________________________________________ 1. Preparatory assistance 150,000 150,000 2. Global and Regional thematic studies - meetings 40,000 40,000 __________________________ 3. Monitoring a) Methodology meetings 65,000 World Heritage Cities 15,000 b) Implementation of programmes: Latin America & the Caribbean 65,000 Africa 55,000 Asia and Pacific 55,000 Arab Region and Europe 40,000 c) ICOMOS 40,000 d) IUCN 45,000 e) WCMC 20,000 _______________________________ Total Monitoring 400,000 420,000 (Note 1) *[46] 4. Technical cooperation 790,000 850,000 5. Training a) ICCROM 90,000 b) IUCN 10,000 c) Other (Note 2) 340,000 ___________________________ Total Training 440,000 440,000 ___________________________ 6. Promotion and Education 270,000 320,000 7. Attendance of experts (LDC & DC) to statutory World Heritage meetings 40,000 40,000 ____________________________ 9. Assistance to the Centre 280,000 280,000 10. Advisory services a) ICOMOS 310,000 b) IUCN 190,000 ___________________________ Total Advisory Services 500,000 500,000 TOTAL BUDGET 2,910,000 3,040,000 _____________________________ XII.2 The Committee also established an Emergency Reserve. In accordance with Financial Regulation, Article 5.1, an amount of US$1 million shall be transferred from the undisposed balance of the Fund to a Reserve Fund to meet requests for assistance resulting from disasters or natural calamities. Expenditure from the Reserve Fund should be made in accordance with the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Approved Emergency Reserve for 1994 and Indicative Reserve for 1995 1994 1995 US$ US$ 1,000,000 *[47] XII.3 After approval of the budget for 1994, the Committee adopted the two following recommendations and decisions for the execution of the budget: 1. The Monitoring budget, which provides for both on-site monitoring and coordinating workshops of site managers, will respect an appropriate flexible ratio in the allocation of resources between natural and cultural programmes. 2. Included in the budget for "Other" amounting to US$340,000, is support for training schools and seminars (e.g. Mweka, Tanzania) in developing countries and for individuals from developing countries to attend training schools and seminars. XII.4 The Committee also decided that: - A balance sheet should be presented by the Director of the Centre at the end of each year. - An amount of US$2 million of the undisposed balance of the Fund should be blocked as a Contingency Reserve. - The Chairperson was authorized to commit up to 20% of the 1995 indicative budget in 1994 for 1995 expenditure if it was considered necessary for the smooth implementation of the programme, on condition that such commitments are within the limits of funds available and that expenditure was made in accordance with the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. XIII. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE XIII.1 The Committee examined document WHC- 93/CONF.002/10Rev. of 5 December 1993 and the Rapporteur of the outgoing Bureau reported on the requests for international assistance approved by the Bureau as well as on the following recommendations to the Committee: A. Technical Assistance Natural Heritage Sangay National Park, Ecuador The Committee recalled that Sangay National Park was on the List of World Heritage in Danger. As requested, IUCN presented a monitoring report on the site. The Committee approved a request for US$ 28,500 for communications equipment, solar panels and donkeys and in addition, some graphic materials for interpretation and public communication. *[48] Mount Nimba, Guinea The Committee recalled that Mount Nimba in Guinea was included on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau had recommended US$ 30,000 for technical assistance, however, in view of the need for on-site management, the Committee recommended that the full request for US$ 45,000 be approved. The funds should be used to provide for consulting services, operational equipment and on-site protection. In addition, a consultant should assist in the implementation of the new administrative centre for which legislation was being prepared. Furthermore, a consultant would organize a donors' meeting aimed at strengthening the management and protection of the site in association with the Biosphere Reserve Programme. Komodo National Park, Indonesia The Bureau recommended to the Committee to approve a sum of US$ 37,000, however after consultation with IUCN which had received new information, the Committee agreed to approve the full request of US $49,500, pending clarification of the training component of the project which involved US$12,500. The technical assistance request included equipment purchases, staff training, socio-economic studies as well as the construction of wells. Cultural Heritage Serra da Capivara National Park, Brazil The Committee reviewed a request for technical assistance for the Serra da Capivara National Park in Brazil, which consisted of two components: a request for US$ 25,000 for measures to protect some of the most visited rock painting sites and to facilitate visitation to these sites, and a request for US$ 28,000 for the purchase of equipment for the inventory and documentation of the rock paintings. The Committee, upon the recommendation of the Bureau, approved an amount of US$ 15,000 under preparatory assistance as it was of the opinion that international expertise should be made available to the site managers with the objective to study the most appropriate protective measures for the rock paintings. The Committee approved also the request for technical assistance for the amount of US$ 28,000 for the purchase of the necessary equipment for inventory and documentation activities. *[49] Old Havana and its fortifications, Cuba Having taken note of the monitoring report that was presented at its session, the Committee approved a request for technical assistance for the amount of US$ 55,000 for Old Havana. Following the recommendation of the monitoring mission, the Committee decided that these funds should be used exclusively for consolidation and restoration works in buildings that will be used for housing purposes. Cliffs of Bandiagara - Land of the Dogons, Mali As recommended by the Bureau, the Committee approved a request for technical assistance for the amount of US$42,000 for a pilot inventory project in three of the 300 villages in the site, each one representative of the three human settlement zones that characterize the site (the plateau, the eroded cliffs and the plain). The funds would be used for equipment (US$ 8,000), research (US$ 2,000), international and national expert services (US$ 29,000) and training activities (US$ 3,000). International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM). The Committee approved a request for the amount of US$ 25,000 for ICCROM's Technical Assistance programme which provides assistance in the form of material, small equipment, publications and expert services to States Parties. B. Training Natural Heritage School for the Training of Wildlife Specialists, Garoua/Cameroon The Committee reviewed a request for US$ 43,667 for a training seminar to be held in Cameroon in 1994. The Committee approved a sum of US$ 35,000 pending receipt by the Centre of more detailed information and a justification of the estimated costs. Training Course - ENGREF (France) The Committee reviewed a request for US$ 40,000 and after considerable discussion approved a sum of US$ 30,000 for a training course by ENGREF to be held in the Tai National Park and World Heritage site. The course was endorsed by the State Party (France). The funds are to be dispersed to facilitate the holding of the course in the World Heritage site as well as for travel and fellowships for participants from developing countries, in particular francophone Africa. *[50] The Centre was requested to contact the course director and to continue discussions vis-à-vis the orientation of the course in relation to the World Heritage Convention and to seek possible linkages with this course and the training school in Garoua. The Committee also requested a comprehensive report from ENGREF on the outcome of the course and the content related to protection and management of World Heritage sites. Cultural Heritage Regional training course of Maghreb architects for the conservation and protection of cultural monuments and sites (1994-1995), Tunisia The Committee approved a request of US$ 50,000 for a regional training course for architects from countries in the Maghreb that will be held in Tunisia in 1994-1995. The course will be implemented by the National Heritage Institute of Tunisia in collaboration with ICCROM and ICOMOS and will train approximately twenty graduates in conservation and management of cultural heritage. International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM). The Committee approved a request for the amount of US$ 75,000 for fellowships for participants from States Parties (developing countries) for three regular ICCROM courses: architectural conservation, conservation of mural paintings and scientific principles of conservation. C. Emergency assistance Cultural Heritage Old Walled City of Shibam, Yemen Having taken note of the state of conservation report presented by the Secretariat which clearly illustrated the emergency situation in Shibam, the Committee approved the request for emergency assistance for the amount of US$ 40,500 for emergency measures regarding the drainage system in Shibam (US$ 30,500) and expert services in this field (US$ 10,000). The Committee asked the Centre to inform the Yemeni authorities that they could submit an additional emergency request for consideration by the Bureau at its next session and to transmit its concern that maintenance programmes should be set up so as to avoid further damage to the site in the future. XIII.2 After having reviewed the requests for technical cooperation, several delegates recalled that the Committee, during its sixteenth session, signaled the need for a systematic evaluation of World Heritage activities. *[51] In this context the Delegate of Germany proposed that biennial reports be prepared by the Centre and presented to the Committee on the implementation of international assistance provided by the World Heritage Fund. The Delegate pointed out that this information was crucial for the evaluation of successive requests for the same site or project, also in view of the fact that World Heritage funding was increasingly only part of more complex funding mechanisms. The Delegate of Germany proposed that the first report would cover the period 1990-1994 and be presented, after discussion in the Bureau, to the Committee at its next session. XIII.3 The Director of the Centre proposed to give a first overview of the available reports on international assistance provided by the States Parties at the next Bureau meeting and to decide on the procedure of reporting on the basis of this overview. The Committee adopted this amendment. XIV. REVISION OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION 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 concerning 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 modifications which had been submitted and which concerned paragraphs: 3, 6, 39, 40, 41, 43, 53, 55, 58, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 78, 79, 83, 88, 89, 94, 103, 112, 113, 114, 117 and 118. The Bureau recommended adoption of this text by the Committee. XIV.2 After discussion, the Committee adopted the Operational Guidelines as amended by the Bureau with the following additional changes: Paragraph 14, the following sentence should be added at the end of the paragraph: "Participation of local people in the nomination process is essential to establish, as much as possible, the shared responsibilities between them and the State Party regarding site maintenance, but should not prejudice future decision-making by the Committee". Paragraph 55: The timetable for the processing of nominations will remain the same in 1994 as in previous years and should be examined in detail at the next session of the Committee. *[52] Paragraph 75: Requests for emergency assistance may be sent to the World Heritage Centre at any time using Form WHC/5. The World Heritage Centre should consult to the extent possible relevant advisory bodies and then submit these requests to the Chairperson who has the authorization to approve emergency requests up to an amount of US$50,000 whereas the Bureau can approve requests up to an amount of US$75,000. Paragraph 83: The Delegate of Colombia proposed that point 5 of para. 83 of the revised Operational Guidelines should take into account the costs of monitoring for the States Parties particularly the developing countries. She suggested deleting the last sentence of this paragraph which reads: "This analysis will be taken into account for the evaluation of the request", pointing out that the provision of the state of conservation report should be optional rather than an obligatory requirement. This proposal was adopted by concensus. Paragraph 89: The last paragraph should read as follows: "However no more than 20% of the total annual assistance budget including technical cooperation and training (but excluding emergency assistance and preparatory assistance, for which separate rules have been established) may be allocated by the Chairperson." Paragraph 118: "The World Heritage Committee has recognized the collective interest that would be advanced by closer coordination of its work with other international conservation instruments. These include the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1954 The Hague Convention, the 1970 UNESCO Convention, the Ramsar Convention, and CITES, as well as other regional conventions and future conventions that will pursue conservation objectives, as appropriate. The Committee will invite representatives of the intergovernmental bodies under related conventions to attend its meetings as observers. Similarly, the Secretariat will appoint a representative to observe meetings of the other inter-governmental bodies upon receipt of an invitation. The Secretariat will ensure through the World Heritage Centre appropriate coordination and information-sharing between the Committee and other conventions, programmes and international organizations related to the conservation of cultural and natural heritage." XIV.3 The Committee decided that a section on monitoring should be included in the Operational Guidelines and asked the World Heritage Centre to undertake in 1994 the necessary work in cooperation with the advisory bodies. XIV.4 The text of the revised Operational Guidelines as adopted by the Committee should be prepared and distributed by the World Heritage Centre to all States Parties early in 1994 in English and French. *[53] XV. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES XV.1 Introducing the working document on promotional activities (WHC-93/CONF-002/6) the Secretariat pointed out that it consisted of two parts: Part I being the report on activities carried out in 1993, and Part II outlining proposals for 1994 and 1995. The first part, written in the established tradition, reports only on the activities undertaken by the World Heritage Centre, without including activities meant to promote the Convention and which may have been carried out by other units of UNESCO, the States Parties themselves or the advisory bodies. Assuming that the report had been read, the presentation highlighted only some of the actions, notably: the success of The World Heritage Newsletter, the ongoing Independent Image production of eight 52-minute TV series on World Heritage sites, the two new postal stamps issued by the French PTT (Angkor and Tassili N'Ajjer) and the recent production of four CD-photos within the project "Patrimony 2001" depicting Angkor, Lalibela, Saint- Petersbourg and the Viking culture. XV.2 Speaking of the plans for 1994-1995, it was underlined that a new strategy was being developed, based on greater concertation and cooperation with the Centre's partners both within and outside of UNESCO. The aim of this would be to use more fully existing networks, thereby increasing the multiplier effect of all the partners concerned. A meeting to that effect would be organized by the Centre at the beginning of 1994. XV.3 Explaining further the proposed plan, the Secretariat outlined the following priority areas for action: (i) establishing a reliable data-base with easily retrievable information on the World Heritage sites and the institutional memory of the Convention; (ii) developing a top-quality photo library, in cooperation with the project "Patrimony 2001", indispensable for good exhibits and for the production of educational and general information material; (iii) using optimally the World Heritage sites for promotional activities, especially in the World Heritage cities where museums and other similar institutions offer an as yet relatively little used potential; (iv) exchange among States Parties of mobile modular photo exhibits; *[54] (v) gradually integrating knowledge on World Heritage into school curricula and extracurricula activities; (vi) production of high-quality information kits for the media in general. In this context, she informed the Committee that the project "Patrimony 2001" had foreseen for 1994 twenty missions covering twenty-nine sites, of which twenty-one were World Heritage properties (3 in Latin America, 8 in Europe, 6 in Asia, 5 in the Arab States and 2 in Africa). XV.4 In conclusion, she also informed the Committee of the Centre's wish to organize, in cooperation with partners within and outside of UNESCO, a Young People's World Heritage Forum, to be held in Bergen, Norway, in summer 1995, within the framework of the second General Assembly of the World Heritage Cities Organization and to mark the Fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations and of UNESCO. The immediate goals of such an event would be to (i) mobilize worldwide attention to the need of developing educational programmes on World Heritage, and (ii) to begin preparing in each of the regions appropriate pedagogic material. XV.5 In the debate that followed, the Delegate of Lebanon underlined the importance of strengthening promotional activities on the sites themselves. He urged the Centre and others concerned to produce simple, easily accessible information material such as the World Heritage poster currently in use. The Delegate of Germany agreed with this but at the same time drew attention to translation costs of such material which needs to be produced in the languages of the States Parties if it is to be effective. The Delegate of China seized this opportunity to inform the Committee of the promotional activities undertaken in 1993 in his country. While the Delegate of Peru suggested that future reports of the Secretariat on promotional activities should also include information on such activities carried out in the States Parties. XV.6 Pointing out that the Committee had just approved a considerable budget for promotional activities in 1994 and 1995, the Observer of Australia regretted that the Report for 1993 on Promotional Activities does not include an evaluation of the work. Furthemore, he warned against an overly-ambitious programme in the future, emphasizing that promotional work is foremost a matter of national concern. XV.7 The Representative of ICOMOS welcomed the proposed promotional and educational plan for 1994-1995, which largely coincides with his Organization's plans. He *[55] continued by pointing out the importance of coordinating UNESCO's actions with those of the advisory bodies, so as to make the best use of the existing potential and to avoid spreading possibly conflicting messages. He underlined also ICOMOS' focus on children and young people, and in this sense looked forward to cooperating with UNESCO. Referring to the comments made by the Observer of Australia, he explained that while the national dimension of promotional and educational work is of primary importance, it cannot be disassociated from international cooperation in matters concerning World Heritage as this, by definition, speaks of the universal. He also referred to ICOMOS' work with the Council of Europe, the aim of which was to sensitize tour operators to World Heritage matters. XV.8 The Observer ICOM-Colombia drew the Committee's attention to museums as a particularly useful network for spreading knowledge on World Heritage to the public in general and especially among the young. XVI. EXAMINATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE REVISED CULTURAL CRITERIA OF THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES FOR THE INCLUSION OF CULTURAL LANDSCAPES ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST XVI.1 The Committee reviewed document WHC-93/CONF.002/9 and information document WHC-93/CONF.002/INF.4. The Committee recalled the decisions taken at its sixteenth session in Santa Fe, New Mexico, in 1992 to include cultural landscapes on the World Heritage List, in particular the revision of the cultural criteria of the Operational Guidelines. The Committee took note of the outcome of the expert meeting held in October 1993 in Templin, Germany, at the request of the Committee. The Committee appreciated the organization of the meeting by the World Heritage Centre, assisted by the German Delegation and funded by the Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt, recognized the work carried out, and noted that the revised cultural criteria and the interpretative paragraphs concerning cultural landscapes in the Operational Guidelines were confirmed by the experts. It furthermore noted, that additional information, guidance and advice be provided to States Parties on the subject of cultural landscapes. XVI.2 The Committee recalled that a specific recommendation by the experts concerning Paragraph 14 of the Operational Guidelines regarding the involvement of people in the nomination procedure was taken into account during the discussion on the revision of the Operational Guidelines (see Chapter XIV of this Report). XVI.3 Several delegates stressed the necessity of an increased involvement of regional experts. The Secretariat *[56] confirmed that the publication of the report of the expert meeting will also include contributions from regions that were not represented at the meeting, and that in the implementation of the Action Plan for the Future a regional approach will be applied. The Delegate of the Philippines announced that preparations are underway for a regional meeting on cultural landscapes to be held in the Philippines in autumn 1994. The Australian Observer underlined the importance of values of indigenous peoples to be recognized both under natural and cultural criteria. XVI.4 Several delegates complemented the Centre and ICOMOS for the work carried out. The Committee adopted the "Action Plan for the Future", including an amendment proposed by the Delegate of Italy stressing the importance of management experiences on the local and community level (the amended Action Plan is attached as an Annex). XVI.5 The Committee invited the Centre to undertake the following actions in 1994 and report back to the eighteenth session of the Committee: - initiate comparative regional thematic studies; - in line with the decisions taken by the Committee regarding tentative lists (see para XI.6), give priority to the revision of these lists to include cultural landscapes; - initiate the development of specific guidelines for the management of cultural landscapes along the lines of the already existing guidelines for cultural World Heritage. XVI.6 The Committee commended the regional approach for future evaluations as outlined by the expert meeting, and requested that the World Heritage Centre implements the suggestions and recommendations made. XVII. DATE AND PLACE OF THE EIGHTEENTH SESSION OF THE BUREAU AND THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE XVII.1 The Committee decided that the eighteenth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee will be held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris from 4 to 9 July 1994. The Committee adopted the provisional agenda for the eighteenth session of the Bureau as outlined in Document WHC- 93/CONF.002/12 with an additional agenda item "International Assistance Projects, Reporting and Evaluation". XVII.2 The Delegate of Thailand transmitted the invitation by the Royal Government of Thailand to host the eighteenth session of the Committee in Thailand. The Representative of the Director-General thanked Thailand for this generous invitation. The Director expressed his thanks and underlined that, however, a formal agreement following *[57] the decisions of the General Conference had to be worked out. The next session of the Committee will be held from 12 to 18 December 1994. XVII.3 Several members of the Committee expressed their gratitude for the kind invitation by Thailand. XVII.4 The German Delegation informed the Committee of the intention of the German Government to host the nineteenth session of the Committee in a World Heritage site in Germany, provided that sufficient funding is available. The Committee welcomed this initiative. XVIII. OTHER QUESTIONS XVIII.1 The Colombian Delegate emphazised the need to analyse the spirit and objectives of the World Heritage Convention in the context of recent developments and negotiations related to environmental issues, in particular the outcome of the UNCED meeting held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The Delegate requested the Secretariat to prepare for the next Bureau meeting a reflection on possible relations between the concept of the world natural heritage and sustainable development and the linkages between the World Heritage Convention, the Biodiversity Convention and other Conventions. The Director of the World Heritage Centre confirmed the importance UNESCO, in general, and the Centre, more specifically, attribute to linking the various conventions, and that UNESCO is actively involved in follow-up actions to the Rio Conference. XVIII.2 The Delegate of Spain informed the Committee that at the invitation of the Spanish Government, an expert meeting would be held in 1994 on cultural itineraries, such as the Route of Santiago de Compostela. The Observer of Canada referred to a related subject matter and informed that in September 1994 a meeting would be held on "World Heritage Canals". The Committee welcomed these initiatives. XVIII.3 The Delegate of the United States referred to Document WHC-93/CONF.002/8 on "Global and Thematic Studies" and encouraged ICOMOS and the Centre to continue their efforts to implement these studies, taking into consideration work already carried out. XVIII.4 ICOMOS drew the attention of the Committee to the serious infrastructural problems in the Potsdam area in Germany. The Committee expressed its concern about the situation. The German Delegation expressed its readines to collaborate with ICOMOS and the Centre to study this matter. XVIII.5 The Delegation of France presented to the Committee a draft declaration concerning the destruction of the heritage in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Representative of the Director-General and several of the delegates confirmed *[58] that the draft declaration was in line with the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, as well as those of the General Conference of UNESCO. Reference was also made to the statement by the Deputy Director-General a.i. at the inaugural session on the violation of international law. XVIII.6 The proposed declaration was unanimously adopted by the Committee, as amended by the Delegation of Italy. (See Annex.) The Committee requested the Secretariat to ensure the widest possible diffusion of the declaration in various languages. XIX. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION XIX.1 On behalf of the Committee, the Chairperson, Ms Olga Pizano, thanked the Rapporteur and the Secretariat of the World Heritage Centre for their efficiency in carrying out the work. She thanked all those who contributed towards the success of the seventeenth session. XIX.2 In the name of the participants, the Delegates of Peru and the United States of America congratulated the Chairperson, the interpreters and the host country staff for their contribution to the success of the meeting. XIX.3 The Observer of Australia expressed his appreciation of the Secretariat's excellent work in preparing the draft final report. XIX.4 The Chairperson then declared the closure of the seventeenth session of the Committee. ===================================================================== ANNEX I Distribution limited WHC-93/CONF.002/INF.3 Distribution limitée Cartagena, 11 December 1993 UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION/ORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIES POUR L'EDUCATION, LA SCIENCE ET LA CULTURE CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE/CONVENTION CONCERNANT LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL CULTUREL ET NATUREL World Heritage Committee/Comité du Patrimoine mondial Seventeenth session/ Dix-septième session Cartagena, Colombia/Carthagène, Colombie 6-11 December/6-11 Décembre 1993 *[ANNEX I/2] LIST OF PARTICIPANTS/LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS I. STATES MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE/ETATS MEMBRES DU COMITE BRAZIL/ BRESIL Mr Carlos Fernando DELPHIM Environmental Preservation and Protection Brazilian Institute of Cultural Heritage Ms Maria Dolores PENNA DE ALMEIDA CUNHA Division of Intellectual Cooperation Ministry of Foreign Affairs Itamaraty Annexo I, Sala 312 BRASILIA CHINA/ CHINE Mr Weichao YU Director Museum of Chinese History State Bureau of Cultural Relics Mr Feng JING Programme Officer Chinese National Commission for UNESCO COLOMBIA/COLOMBIE Dr Juan Luis MEJIA Director-General Colombian Institute for Culture COLCULTURA Calle 9 8-31 BOGOTA Ms Olga PIZANO Deputy Director of Cultural Heritage COLCULTURA Colombian Institute for Culture Calle 9# 8-31 BOGOTA *[ANNEX I/3] Dr Jaime GIRON DUARTE Director-General Organismos y Conferencias Politicos Economicos y Sociales Multilaterales Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ms Nora TRUJILLO BURGOS Director Asuntos Culturales Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr Rodrigo CORTES Universidad Nacional de Colombia Ciudad Universitaria, Facultad de Artes Calle del Sargento Mayor 6-74 BOGOTA Dr Isabel VERNAZA First Secretary Permanent Delegation of Colombia to UNESCO UNESCO House 1 rue Miollis 75015 PARIS Ms Gloria OVIEDO CHAVES Agregada Cultural Ministry of Foreign Affairs BOGOTA Ms Mery Cecilia HURTADO Councillor Encargada de las funciones del Area de la UNESCO del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores Deleqados por el Inderena Dr Nancy VALLEJO General Secretary INDERENA Cra. 10 No. 20-30, P.5 BOGOTA Dr Jorge HERNANDEZ Investigador Cientifico de la Division de Fauna Ms Leonor HERBERD COLCULTURA-ICAN Architect Carrera 8 No. 8-87 BOGOTA *[ANNEX I/4] Dr Maragarita MARINO DE BOTERO Presidenta de la Junta del Colegio Verde en Villa de Leyva Dr Martha ROJAS Chief, Division of National Parks Cra. 10 No. 20-30 P8 BOGOTA Mr José Pablo URICOECHEL Presidente de la S.C.E. Colombia Union Internacional de Arquitectos (UIA) Mr G. BUSTAMNTE Director, Escuala Taller Calle Universidad No. 36-145 CARTEGENA Mr Rogelio SALMONA Car. 5 No. 26-39 BOGOTA Ms Carmen GARCIA BIELSA Secretariat de la Planificacion Departamental Centro, Plaza de la Proclamacion BOGOTA Mr Guillermo LAIQUELET Asesor cultural de Bellas Artes CARTAGENA Mr Guillermo GALAN-CORREA Director Fundaciones del Banco de la Reoublica Edificio Avianca Calle 16, No.6 BOGOTA Mr David MENESES Subdirector Fundacion Patrimonio Cultural Colombiano Calle 80 No. 7-49 BOGOTA Mr Guillermo LIEVANO Director Instituto de la Cultura Gobernacion del Huila A.A. No. 047 NEIVA *[ANNEX I/5] Mr Roberto PINEDA Director Instituto Colombiano de Antropologia Calle 8 No. S-87 BOGOTA Ms Esperanzo PAEZ Direccion General de Asuntos Culturales Delegados por COLCULTURA Arquitectos: Mr Alberto SALDARRIAGA Mr Rogelio SALMONA Mr Jose SALAZAR Mr Pedro Miguel NAVAS Ms Carolina BARCO DE BOTERO Mr Lorenzo FONSECA FRANCE M. Jean-Louis PONS Chargé de mission pour les Affaires internationales à la Direction de la Nature et du Paysage Ministère de l' Environnement 14, Boulevard du Général Leclerc 92524 NEUILLY-sur-SEINE M. Léon PRESSOUYRE Professeur Université de æaris I 75005 PARIS J- Mme Anne LEWIS-LOUBIGNAC Conseiller technique Commission nationale française pour l'UNESCO 42 avenue Raymond Poincaré 75116 PARIS GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE Mr Hans CASPARY Conservator of Historic Monuments Landesamt fur Denkmalpslege Rheinland-Pfalz Gottelmannstrasse 17 D-6500 Mainz 1 Germany *[ANNEX I/6] Mr Harald PLACHTER Fachgehiet Naturschutz Fachbereich Biologie Lahnberge 35032 MARBURG INDONE8IA/INDONE8IE Mr HERMONO Third Secretary Embassy of Indonesia BOGOTA Colombia ITALY/ITALIE H.E. Mr Giancarlo LEO Ambassador, Permanent Delegate Permanent Delegation of Italy to UNESCO UNESCO House 1, rue Miollis 75015 PARIS Mr Francesco FRANCIONI Professor of International Law University of Sienna SIENNA Mrs Margherita SABATINI General Direction for Cultural Relations Ministry for Foreign Affairs Via N. Tilli 62 00156 ROME Ms Rosalba TARDITO Ministry of Culture Via Passo di Fargorida 12 MILAN Mr Pietro LAUREANO Architect via Passarelli 64 MATERA Mr Astier OGBAI via Passarelli 64 MATERA *[ANNEX I/7] JAPAN/JAPON Mr Masaru WATANABE Deputy Director Second Cultural Affairs Division Ministry of Foreign Affaris TOKYO Mr Kunio KIKUCHI Director Planning Division Nature Conservation Bureau Environment Agency 1-2-2 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ku TOKYO Mr Migaku TANAKA Councillor on Cultural Properties Cultural Properties Protection Department Agency for Cultural Affairs TOKYO Mr Hidetoshi SAITO Chief Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties Cultural Properties Protection Bureau Agency for Cultural Affairs Ministry of Education, Science and Culture 3-2-2 Kasumigaseki Chiyodaku TOKYO 100 Mr Masahiko KATO Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties Cultural Properties Protection Bureau Agency for Cultural Affairs TOKYO Mr Kensei ODA Assistant Director, Planning Division National Forest Service Forestry Agency Ministry of Agriculture Forestry & Fisheries 1-2-1 Kasumigaseki Chiyoda-ku TOKYO *[ANNEX I/8] LEBANON/LIBAN Mr Bahjat RIZK Cultural Attachée Permanent Delegation of the Lebanon to UNESCO UNESCO House 1, rue Miollis 75015 PARIS MEXICO / MEXIQUE Mr Salvador DIAZ-BERRIO Deputy Director Technical Support and Training (INAH) CORDOBA 45 MEXICO D.F. 06710 Mr Raul TOLEDO FADRIOS Presidente Junto de Protection de Monumentos del Estado Ex Colegio San Luis Gonzago Plazo St. Domingo ZACATECAS Mr Carlos FLORES MARIMI Prsidente ICOMOS-Mexico Mazatlam 190 MEXICO 11 D.F. CP 06140 Ms Rufina HERNANDEZ Defensa del Patrimoine Construido Av.2 Oriente No. 1214 Q.P. 72000 Ms Louise Noelle GRAS Ahuehuetes Sur 260 MEXICO DF 11920 OMAN Mr Gihazi AL RAWAS First Secretary Embassy of the Sultanate of Oman 2535 Belmont Road WASHINGTON DC USA *[ANNEX I/9] PERU/PEROU Mr Martin YRIGOYEN Ambassador General Director Diffusion and Cultural Affairs Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malecon Cisneros 1270 Miraflores LIMA PHILIPPINES Mr Augusto F. VILLALON Commissioner for Philippine Cultural Heritage Philippine National Commission for UNESCO 107 Wilson Circle SAN JUAN 1500 M. MANILA Mrs Deanna ONGPIN-RECTO Attaché to the Philippine Permanent Delegation to UNESCO UNESCO House 1, rue Miollis 75015 PARIS SENEGAL Mr Mbaye Bassine DIENG Director Historic and Ethnographic Culture B.P. 4001 DAKAR SPAIN/ESPAGNE Mr D. José GUIRAO CABRERA Director-General Bellas Artes y Archivos Ms Maria MARINE ISIDRO Deputy Director of Monuments and Archaeology ICRBC GRECO SN 25048 MADRID *[ANNEX I/10] THAILAND/THAILANDE Dr Adul WICHIENCHAROEN Chairman National Committee for Protection of the World Cultural & Natural Heritage BANGKOK Mr Sunthad SOMCHEVITA Secretary-General Office of Environmental Policy & Planning 60/1 Phibulwattana Rama IV Road BANGKOK 10400 Mr Payung NOPSUWAN Director of National Park Division Royal Forest Department BANGKOK Mr Manit SIRIWAN Director of Natural and Cultural Heritage Conservation Division Secretary to the National Committee on World Heritage BANGKOK Mr Prachot SANGKHANUKIJ Director of Archaeology Division Fine Arts Department BANGKOK Mr Sod DAENGIAG Archaeology Administrative Officer Fine Arts Department BANGKOK Mr M.L. Chiranand HASDINTRA Director of Economic Projects Division III Bureau of Budget Office of the Prime Minister BANGKOK Ms Srianong KUNGKAYA Secretariat Officer The National Committee for Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage Office of Environmental Policy and Planning *[ANNEX I/11] UNITED STATE8 OF AMERICA/ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE Mr Robert MILNE Chief, Office of International Affairs National Park Service Department of the Interior P.O. Box 37127 WASHINGTON D.C.20013 Mr Richard COOK Chief, International Affairs National Park Service P.O. Box 37127 WASHINGTON D.C. 20013 Mr E. Blaine CLIVER Chief, Preservation Technology National Park Service P.O. Box 37127 WASHINGTON DC 20013-7127 Mr Richard G. RING Manager Everglades National Park National Park Service 4001 State Route 9336 Homestead, Florida 33034 II. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVIS0RY CAPACITY/ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT A TITRE CONSULTATIF INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES/CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES (ICOMOS) Mr Jean-Louis LUXEN Secretary General 75 rue du Temple 75003 PARIS France Mr Herb STOVEL 301 Strathearn Avenue MONTREAL Quebec Mr Henry CLEERE World Heritage Co-ordinator 75, rue du Temple 75003 PARIS *[ANNEX I/12] Ms Carmen ANON FELIU Puerto Santamaria 49 MADRID 28043 Spain Mr Augusto MOLINA ICOMOS-Mexico otivo 48 01030 MEXIFO DF Mr Peter STOTT ICOMOS-US 23 Bellevue Street MEDFORD MA 02155 USA THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)/UNION MONDIALE POUR LA NATURE (UICN) Mr James THORSELL Senior Advisor - Natural Heritage Rue Mauverney, 28 CH-1196 GLAND Switzerland INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESERVATION AND THE RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY/CENTRE INTERNATIONAL D'ETUDES POUR LA CONSERVATION ET LA RESTAURATION DES BIENS CULTURELS (ICCROM) Mr Jukka JOKILEHTO Chief Architectural Conservation Programme Via di S. Michele, 13 00153 ROME Italy INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS/CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MUSEES (ICOM) Ms Diana TORRES DE OSPINA Chairperson ICOM National Committee of Colombia *[ANNEX I/13] III. OBSERVERS/OBSERVATEURS AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE Mr Jonathan BROWN Counsellor Deputy Permanent Delegate to UNESCO Australian Embassy 4 rue Jean Rey 75015 PARIS BULGARIA/BULGARIE Mr Branimor NATOV Deputy Minister Ministry of Environment 67 Gladetone str. SOFIA CANADA Mme Gisèle CANTIN Chief, Affaires Intergouvernementales Service Canadien des Parcs Environnement du Canada 25, rue Eddy HULL, Quebec K1A OH3 CUBA Ms Marta ARJONA Director, Cultural Heritaqe J Calle 4 y 11 Vedado LA HABANA CZECH REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE Mr V. BUCEK Ambassador Embassy of the Czech Republic Av. 7 - 113 - 16 BOGOTA Colombia *[ANNEX I/14] EL SALVADOR Mr Alexander A. KRAVETZ Embassador of El Salvador to Colombia Embassy of El Salvador Crra. 9a, No. 80-15 BOGOTA Colombia Ms Maria I. ARSUZ Director Cultural Heritage of El Salvador Ave. la Revolucien BENIJO SN GUINEA/GUINEE Mr Lancei BAKAYOKO Director-General MIFER B.P. 837 CONAKRY HOLY SEE/SAINT-SIEGE H.E. Mr Ernesto Gallina Archbishop, Apostolic Nuncio Delegate for International Governmental Organizations Vatican City ROME Mr Gilberto HUYOS HOYOS Rector of the Cathedral Apartado 400 Calle Arzobispardo No 34-55 BOGOTA HUNGRY/HONGRIE Mr Ferenc SZONYI Chargé d'Affaires Embassy of Hungry to Colombia Bogota Colombia *[ANNEX I/15] NEPAL Mr Khadga Man SHRESTHA Director-General Department of Archaeology Ministry of Education, Culture and Social Welfare KATHAMNDU NEW ZEALAND Mr David TAYLOR Deputy director Environment Division Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade The Terrace WELLINGTON PERU/PEROU Arq. Hugo BOGADO Director, Cultural Heritage Ministry of Education Fecicianfeci 688 ASUNCION Arq. Julio Cesar ESCOBAR General Directorate of Tourism ASUNCION Arq. ZORAIDA MEZQUITA General Directorate of Tourism ASUNCION ROMANIA/ROUMANIE Mr Ioan OPRIS Director-General Ministry of Culture BUCHAREST SLOVAK REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE Mrs Viera DVORAKOVA Architect Institute for the Protection of Monuments Zaveterna 9 BRATISLAVA 84107 *[ANNEX I/16] SWEDEN SUEDE Ms Birgitta HOBERG Head of Department Central Board of National Antiquities P.O. Box 5405 11484 STOCKHOLM SWITZERLAND/SUISSE Mr Jean-Marc BOULGARIS Ambassador of Switzerland to Colombia Swiss Embassy BOGOTA Colombia VENEZUELA Ms Elina LOVERA UNESCO Coro Centre Parque Res. Los Caobos Apto. 46 Torre A La Candelaria CARACAS Ms Ana Maria REYES UNESCO Coro Centre Calle sucre No.22 LA VELA DE CORO V. SECRETARIAT Mr Adnan BADRAN Deputy Director-General a.i. Mr. Bernd von DROSTE Director World Heritage Centre Mr Mounir BOUCHENAKI Director Division of Cultural Heritage Ms Breda PAVLIC World Heritage Centre *[ANNEX I/17] Mr Harold EIDSVIK World Heritage Centre Mr Mark WARREN Bureau of the Budget Mr Herman van HOOFF World Heritage Centre Ms Mechtild ROSSLER World Heritage Centre Mr Gérard BOLLA UNESCO Consultant Ms F. TRUEL Interpretation Division Ms Jane DEGEORGES World Heritage Centre Ms Marianne RAABE World Heritage Centre Mr David MARTEL World Heritage Centre UNESCO/UNDP Mr Sylvio MUTAL Chief, UNDP/UNESCO Project Casilla 4480 LIMA +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ANNEX II Limited distribution WHC-93/CONF.002/1Prov./Rev. Original: French Paris, 28 November 1993 UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE Seventeenth Session Cartagena, Colombia 6 to 11 December 1993 REVISED PROVISIONAL AGENDA 1. Opening of the session by the Director-General or his representative. 2. Adoption of the provisional agenda. 3. Election of the Chairperson, Vice-Chairpersons and Rapporteur. 4. Report of the Secretariat on activities undertaken since the sixteenth session of the Committee. 5. Report of the Rapporteur of the seventeenth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee. 6. Establishment of a sub-committee to examine budgetary questions. 7. Revision of the Operational Guidelines concerning the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. 8. Examination of methodological aspects of monitoring of the state of conservation of properties. 9. Report on the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. 10. Examination of proposals for inscription of cultural and natural properties on the World Heritage List and List of World Heritage in Danger. *[ANNEX II/2] 11. Promotional activities. 12. Examination of the application of the cultural landscape criterion. 13. Requests for international assistance. 14. Situation of the World Heritage Fund and adoption of a budget for 1994 (following recommendations of the Sub- Committee). 15. Date and place of the eighteenth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee. 16. Other business 17. Adoption of the Report by the Committee. 18. Closure of the session. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ANNEX III ADDRESS BY MR A. BADRAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL a.i. OF UNESCO AT THE SEVENTEENTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE Cartagena, Colombia, 6 December 1993 Mr Chairman, Honoured representatives of the Government of Colombia, Members of the World Heritage Committee, Ladies and Gentlemen, Three weeks ago, on learning of the destruction of the graceful sixteenth-century bridge "Stari Most" of Mostar, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was not a World Heritage site but nonetheless a great centuries-old symbol to Bosnian and many other people, the Director-General of UNESCO stated: "By destroying it, the perpetrators of this disgraceful act are trying to eradicate the history of a country and its people. They are thereby also destroying the bridges of mutual understanding built by people of different origins and religious beliefs who had learnt to live together in harmony." This quote strikes me as an appropriate way to begin my address to the participants of this seventeanth session of the World Heritage Committee, whom I have the honour and the pleasure to greet on behaif of Mr Federico Mayor, the Director-General of UNESCO. It is an illustration of the great importance UNESCO attaches to the preservation of outstanding cultural, natural and mixed sites! which are not only expressions of Nature's and humankind's creative genius, but are also deep-rooted symbois OL the latter's hopes and aspirations. Before elaborating this further, I should first like to convey our heartiest thanks to the Government of Colombia for its generous offer to host this important meeting. More specifically, our sincere gratitude is addressed foremost to the Colombian Institute for Culture (COLCULTURA), and particularly to Ms Olga Pizano, the Deputy Director for Cultural Heritage and her team, whose efficiency and friendliness have been a great asset in organizing the meeting so successfully. May I also take this opportunity to greet the representatives of the newly elected members of the World Heritage Committee, namely, the delegates of Brazil, France, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Niger and the United States of America, and to thank most sincerely the outgoing Chairman, Mr Robert Milne, for his endeavours to promote the World Heritage Convention. *[ANNEX III/2] Mr Chairman, As you are well aware, the General Conference of UNESCO ended its twenty-seventh session only three weeks ago. Permit me, therefore, to present to you briefly some of the salient points emerging from its work as regards the preservation of the world's cultural and natural heritage. The implementation of the World Heritage Convention was discussed in Commission IV, within the framework of UNESCO's Major Programme Area III (Culture: Past, Present and Future) and on the basis of the 1992-1993 Report of the World Heritage Committee - more particularly the Committee's Strategic Orientations, adopted in Santa Fe, in December 1992. Without going into detail, I am happy to inform you that there was unanimous agreement that the preservation of cultural and natural propert ies wh ich are of outstanding un iversa l va lue rema ins among UNESCO' s priority tasks. This is reflected in paragraphs (a), (b) and (e) of Resolution 3.1 which invites the Director-General, inter alia: "(a) to promote the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage among Member States and the general public, to ensure systematic and continuous monitoring of sites cavered by the Convention, to identify action to be taken to ensure their conservation, and to mobilize the resources required for that purpose; (b) to enhance preventive action in the Member States for the protection of cultural property and to facilitate prompt intervention in case of natural or human-made disasters; and (e) to mobilize international support for safeguarding operations and to strengthen on-site training of conservation specialists." The debate at the General Conference underlined also the need to set up within UNESCO a specialised data-bank and documentation service based on the information provided by systematic monitoring of the World Heritage sites. In view of the increasing threats to some of the sites and the need to assure better protection therefore, the General Conference adopted also a resolution on "co-operation for the safeguarding of the ecocultural heritage of the historical Angkor area" which, inter alia, requests the Director-General "(i) to fully implement the decision of the World Heritage Committee", and "(iv) to mobilize international support for safeguarding operations with a special effort to reinforce the international co-operation to save Angkor." As for Jerusalem, the General Conference adopted a resolution which invites the Director-General "to continue his efforts to secure the implementation of UNESCO' s decisions and resolutions concerning Jerusalem, firmly ensuring that the mission conferred on UNESCO by its Constitution, the 1972 Convention and the various resolutions concerning Jerusalem is respected." *[ANNEX III/3] The General Conference furthermore stressed the need to develop innovative communication and education projects designed to increase awareness and support for the World Heritage programme, particularly among decision-makers and the young. Guided by the decisions adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its sixteenth session held last year in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and taking into consideration the resolutions of UNESCO' s General Conference, the work of UNESCO' s World Heritage Centre will focus in 1994-1995 upon: servicing the World Heritage statutory bodies; completing at least two thematic studies as part of a global study; the establishment of a representative World Heritage List; technical, i.e., preparatory assistance for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention; monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage sites and, finally, World Heritage promotion and education. The implementation of this Workplan, as underlined in its introductory part, can only be achieved through close and permanent cooperation with all relevant units within the UNESCO Secretariat, both at Headquarters and in the field, as well as with the full involvement of the States Parties themselves and the concerned international bodies, notably ICCROM, ICOMOS and the IUCN, to mention but these. The plan introduces a number of novelties, the most important being the systematic monitoring of the state of conservation of the World Heritage sites in different regions of the world. Your Committee gave high priority to this field of action at its last year's session, and a special budget line was created to that effect. As you know, a pilot programme for monitoring cultural and mixed sites in Latin America and the Caribbean is being implemented since 1991 as a joint UNDP/UNESCO Regional Project. This programme is expected to conclude in 1994 and you will hear more about it during this very session. On my part, let me just say that we hope that a regional World Heritage state of conservation report, the first of its kind, can be produced in the near future for Latin America and the Caribbean. Furthermore, an expert meeting on monitoring methodology was held in Cambridge,UK, just last November, and its results have been included in the working documents for this session. Depending on the outcome of your deliberations, the World Heritage Centre, jointly with the advisory bodies, is ready to set up systematic monitoring programmes for other regions, more particularly for Africa and Asia. The elaboration of a more comprehensive multimedia information- promotion and education strategy, adjusted to various "target groups" and especially to children and young people, and the exploration and development of an overall marketing strategy requested by the World Heritage Committee under Strategic Goal No. 5 (Increasing public awareness and support) are other new elements proposed in the Centre 's Workplan. In addition to *[ANNEX III/4] these, the programme now also includes cultural landscapes. All this will necessarily demand significant human and financial resources, and it will be up to you to decide on these questions in more detail in the coming days. Among the innovations that the World Heritage Centre is expected to launch within the next two-year period, I should like to point out particularly the creation of an increasing number of national World Heritage Associations which are meant to strengthen the decentralization of the work regarding the implementation of the Convention. This, as you may well know, could be achieved through various means, one of them stemming possibly from the permanent information-exhibition centres which some of the World Heritage cities intend to create with UNESCO's help. Further along this line of thinking it is also possible to envisage "twinning" arrangements, whereby the more well-off States Parties could help those that are less fortunate. I am confident that the members of this Committee as well as the observers present at this meeting, given their vast knowledge and experience, will be able to elaborate these proposals in greater detail. Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, Fully aware of this meeting's agenda and the demanding task ahead of you, I wish you, on behalf of the Director-General, as well as in my own name, a very successful session. May you be guided in your deliberations by the full certitude that the Secretariat of UNESCO stands, as always, ready to assist you in the complex, yet so noble task of promoting the implementation of the 1972 World Heritage Convention. Finally, in conclusion, I have the pleasure of informing you that thanks to the Centre 's particular effort, the newly inscribed sites will this year be presented publicly at a photo- exhibit which will be inaugurated by the Director-General at UNESCO' s Headquarters on 20 December, i.e., only a week after your deliberations. Such exhibits, we hope, will henceforth become standard practice.In the midst of our daily concerns, frequently burdened with rather tedious tasks, the World Heritage programme offers us moments of beauty, inspiration and - allow me to say - an invitation to dream. Your work, Ladies and Gentlemen, is therefore of utmost importance and we look forward to cooperating with all of you in the coming years. *[further annexes] IV. Report on the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention since the sixteenth session of the World Heritage Committee V. World Heritage Committee Declaration on Bosnia VI. Report of the Expert Meeting on "Approaches to the Monitoring of World Heritage Properties: "Exploring ways and means", Cambridge, U.K. (1 to 4 November 1993) VII. Report of the International Expert Meeting on "Cultural Landscapes of Outstanding Universal Value", Templin, Germany (12 to 17 October 1993) VIII.Action Plan for the Future (Cultural Landscapes) *[EOF]