Limited distribution SC-87/CONF.005/9
Paris, 20 January 1988
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE
REPORT OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Eleventh session
(Unesco Headquarters, 7-11 December 1987)
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The eleventh session of the World Heritage Committee was held at
Unesco Headquarters from 7-11 December 1987. It was attended by the
following members of the Committee: Algeria, Australia, Brazil,
Bulgaria, Canada, Cuba, France, Greece, India, Italy, Lebanon,
Mexico, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Turkey, United Republic of
Tanzania, United States of America, Yemen Arab Republic.
2. Representatives of the International Council on Monuments and
Sites (ICOMOS), and of the International Union for the Conservation
of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) attended the session in an
advisory capacity.
3. The following States Parties to the Convention, which were not
members of the Committee, were represented as observers: Argentina,
Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China (People's Rep. of),
Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Cyprus, Ecuador, Finland, Germany (Fed.
Rep. of), Guatemala, Holy See, Hungary, Iran (Islamic Republic of),
Iraq, Jordan, Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Peru, Spain, Switzerland,
Thailand, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and
Yugoslavia. The German Democratic Republic which is a non State
party to the Convention also attended as an observer.
Representatives of the International Council of Museums (ICOM), the
Arab Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO),
the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Food Programme
also attended the session. The full list of participants is found
as Annex 1 to this report.
II. OPENING OF THE SESSION
4. The representative of the Director-General, Mr. A. Kaddoura,
Assistant Director-General of the Science Sector opened the meeting
and welcomed all participants. In particular, he congratulated the
new members of the Committee which had been elected at the Sixth
General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention, held during
*[2] the 24th session of the Unesco General Conference on 30
October 1987. He also outlined the importance of the work of the
Convention which had been recognized by all Member States of Unesco
at the last General Conference.
III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
5. With a modification in the order of examination of cultural and
natural nominations, the Committee adopted the agenda for the
session.
IV. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN RAPPORTEUR AND VICE-CHAIRMEN
6. Mr. J.D. Collinson (Canada) was re-elected Chairman of the
Committee by acclamation. Mrs. M. Stantcheva (Bulgaria) was elected
as Rapporteur and the following members of the Committee as Vice-
Chairmen: France, Mexico, Sri Lanka, and Tunisia and the United
Republic of Tanzania.
V. REPORT OF THE SECRETARIAT
7. The Secretary for the session, Mr. B. von Droste, Director,
Division of Ecological Sciences presented the report of activities
undertaken to implement the Convention since the last session of
the Committee which was held from 24 to 28 November 1986. The
number of countries that had deposited an instrument of
ratification or acceptance to the Convention had risen to 99 and
several other countries, for example Cape Verde, Congo, Indonesia,
Kenya, Malaysia and Uruguay had indicated their intention to become
States Parties. Representation in the Asian region continued to be
relatively low, however two regional meetings - one in Sri Lanka on
natural heritage and another in India on cultural heritage - were
taking place and would stimulate more interest in the work of the
Convention. The number of nominations also continued to increase
and some measures had been considered by the Bureau of the
Committee to manage the heavy work load which this entailed. The
Committee was informed of the numerous projects for international
assistance and training which had been approved over the last year.
It was encouraging to note that there was an increase in the number
of technical cooperation requests submitted to the Committee at
this session. In this connection, it was noted that the Chairman,
Mr. Collinson, accompanied by Mr. von Droste, had held a meeting
with World Bank officials in view of cooperating on World Bank
projects which may affect World Heritage properties. Finally,
considerable efforts had been undertaken bath by individual States
Parties and by the Secretariat to Promote the work of the
Convention.
VI. TENTATIVE LISTS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES
8. The Committee was informed that, since its last session, the
tentative list of cultural properties of Sri Lanka as well as the
tentative list of cultural and natural properties of Bolivia,
China, Jamaica and the Philippines had been received by the
Secretariat. In addition, the tentative list of cultural properties
of the Maldives had been received and would be submitted to the
Committee in 1988, after it had been completed. The number of
States having submitted the tentative list of their cultural and
natural Properties and the *[3] number of States having submitted
the tentative list of their cultural properties only was
respectively 18 and 12. Furthermore, the Secretariat informed the
Committee that, in pursuance of a request of the Bureau in June
1987, a circular letter had been prepared to be sent to all those
States Parties which had not submitted their tentative lists,
asking them to do so as early as possible. Furthermore, the
Committee was informed of meetings organized in 1985, 1986 and 1987
by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) for
the harmonization of tentative lists of cultural properties of
North-African countries, French-speaking African countries,
North-European countries and countries of the Balkan region. The
harmonization of tentative lists of cultural properties in the
Asian countries would also be one of the items to be discussed at
the regional meeting in India in December 1987. Lastly, the
Secretariat recalled that the States which so wished could present
a request for preparatory assistance for drawing up the tentative
list of their properties.
VII. NOMINATIONS TO THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
9. The Committee examined 61 nominations to the World Heritage
List, taking account of the recommendations of ICOMOS and IUCN for
each nomination. The Committee decided to include 41 cultural and
natural properties on the World Heritage List and one extension,
which are presented in section A below. The Committee also decided
to defer its decision on 16 nominations, as noted under section B,
and decided not to include 4 properties on the World Heritage List
(section C). Finally, the Committee noted that the United Kingdom
had withdrawn the nominations of Diana's Peak and High Peak, St.
Helena, and of St. David's close and Bishop's Palace.
A. Cultural and Natural Properties inscribed on the World
Heritage List
Name of property Identifi- Contracting State Criteria
cation No. having submitted
the nomination of
the property in
accordance with
the Convention
Kakadu National Park 147 Australia N(ii)(iii)(iv)
(extension to include C(iii)
Stage II)
The Committee recalled that at its 5th session held in Sydney
(Australia) in 1981, while inscribing Kakadu National Park on the
World Heritage List, it had noted that the Australian Government
intended to proclaim additional areas in the Alligator River Region
as part of Kakadu National Park and had recommended that such areas
be included in the site inscribed on the World Heritage List. The
Committee therefore welcomed the extension of the site to include
such areas, which had been favourably reviewed by ICOMOS and IUCN.
The Committee accordingly decided to include Stage II in the site
inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee commended the
Australian *[4] authorities for having taken appropriate
legislative measures to prohibit mineral exploration and mining and
for their efforts to restore the natural ecosystems of the site. It
also encouraged the Australian authorities to consider further
extending the World Heritage site to include Stage III of the
National Park and to modify the boundaries of Stages I and II in
order to protect the entire catchment area, and to include the
cultural values to the East of the present National Park.
Finally, the Committee requested the Australian authorities to
provide further information on the possible impact of proposed
military training activities in areas adjacent to the World
Heritage site.
Uluru National Park 447 Australia N(ii)(iii)
The Committee commended the Australian authorities on the manner in
which the management of this property gave an appropriate blend of
the cultural and natural characteristics of this property. The
Committee expressed the view that the site could be extended to
include areas which would give a more complete representation of
the arid zone and encouraged the Australian authorities to continue
their efforts to reintroduce previously occurring native species.
City of Potosi 420 Bolivia C(ii)(iv)(vi)
Brasilia 445 Brazil C(i)(iv)
The Committee recommended that a conservation policy which respects
the characteristics of the urban creation of 1956 be pursued in the
federal district of Brasilia.
Mount Taishan 437 China C(i)(ii)(iii)
(People's Rep. of) (iv)(v)(vi)
N(iii)
The Committee took note with satisfaction of the assurances given
by the observer from China. They responded to the preoccupations of
the Bureau which was concerned by the proliferation of buildings
and tourism installations. The Committee endorsed the
recommendations of the Bureau and requested that particular care be
taken in developing this unique site.
The Great Wall 438 China C(i)(ii)(iii)
(People's Rep. of) (iv)(vi)
Imperial Palace of the 439 " C(iii)(iv)
Ming and Qing Dynasties
*[5]
Mogao Caves 440 China C(i)(ii)
(People's Rep. of) (iii)(iv)
(v) (vi)
The Committee drew the attention of the Chinese authorities to the
need to take all necessary measures to safeguard the very
vulnerable rock site of Mogao Caves. The Committee would like to be
kept informed of all action undertaken to this end.
The Mausoleum of the 441 " C(i)(iii)
First Qin Emperor (iv)(vi)
The Committee would like to be informed by the Chinese authorities
of the plans for the archaeological exploration, presentation and
management of the site.
Peking Man Site at 449 " C(iii)(vi)
Zhoukoudian
Dja Faunal Reserve 407 Cameroon N(ii)(iv)
The Committee strongly encouraged the Cameroon authorities to
continue the process to upgrade the legal status of this reserve to
strengthen its protection, and also to adopt and implement the
draft management plan prepared by the Garoua College. The Committee
encouraged the Cameroon authorities to continue detailed surveys of
the flora and fauna and to increase the documentation on the
natural resources. Finally, the Committee also requested the
Cameroon authorities to ensure that the planning of the trans-
african highway would take into account its possible impacts the
site.
Gros Morne National Park 419 Canada N(i)(iii)
Hanseatic City of Lübeck 272 Rev. Germany C(iv)
(Fed. Rep. of)
The Committee recommended that the archaeological exploitation
under the historic city of Lübeck be pursued, including in the
zones not inscribed on the World Heritage List, and wished to be
kept informed.
Archaeological Site of 393 Greece C (i) (ii)
Delphi (iii)(iv)(vi)
The Acropolis, Athens 404 Greece C(i)(ii)(iii)
(iv)(vi)
*[6]
Budapest, the banks of 400 Hungary C(ii)(iv)
the Danube with the
district of Buda Castle
The Committee took note of the statement made by the observer from
Hungary that his Government undertook to make no modifications to
the panorama of Budapest by adding constructions out of scale.
Hollokö 401 Rev. Hungary C(v)
The Committee took note with satisfaction of the statement made by
the observer from Hungary who recalled that Hollokö was protected
not only by legal provisions but also by the will of all its
inhabitants.
Group of monuments at 239 Rev. India C(iii) (iv)
Pattadakal
Elephanta Caves 244 Rev. " C(i) (iii)
The Committee took note with satisfaction of the statement of the
representative of India that her Government would take appropriate
steps to protect this fragile property from the possible adverse
impact of industrial projects in the vicinity.
Bribadisvara Temple, 250 Rev. " C(ii)(iii)
Thanjavur
Sundarbans National Park 452 " N(ii)(iv)
The Committee expressed the wish that the revised management plan
be adopted as soon as possible and requested the Indian authorities
to monitor projects that might have adverse effects on the park.
The Committee recommended that research work aimed at the
management of the tiger populations needed to be encouraged.
The Committee furthermore encouraged the Bangladesh authorities to
nominate the adjacent Sundarbans reserves in Bangladesh.
Venice and its lagoon 394 Italy C(i)(ii)(iii)
(iv)(v)(vi)
Plazza del Duomo, Pisa 395 " C(i)(ii)(iv)
(vi)
*[7]
Sian Ka'an 410 Mexico N(iii)(iv)
Pre-Hispanic City and 411 " C(i)(ii)(iii)
National Park of (iv)
Palenque
Historic Centre of 412 " C(ii)(iii)(iv)
Mexico City and Xochimilco (v)
Pre-Hispanic City of 414 " C(i)(ii)(iii)
Teotihuacan (iv)(vi)
The Committee took note with satisfaction of the progress achieved
with respect to the draft decree designed to protect the whole of
the valley of Teotihuacan.
Historic Centre of Oaxaca 415 " C(i)(ii)(iii)
and Archaeological site (iv)
of Monte Alban
Historic Centre of Puebla 416 " C(ii)(iv)
The Committee considered that the complementarity of the colonial
city of Puebla and of the Pre-Hispanic site of Cholula had been
weakened by the urbanization of the area and that it was therefore
not possible in the present circumstances to proceed with a joint
inscription. Consequently, the historic centre of Puebla alone was
inscribed on the World Heritage List.
Ksar of Aït-Ben-Haddou 444 Morocco C(iv)(v)
Bahla Fort 433 Oman C(iv)
Concerned by the degradation of the earth structures of the fort
and of the oasis of Bahla, the Committee suggested that the
Sultanate of Oman submit a request for technical cooperation and
consider the possibility of nominating this property for
inscription on the World Heritage List in Danger.
Manu National Park 402 Peru N(ii)(iv)
The Committee encouraged the Peruvian authorities to continue to
involve assistance agencies in providing support for this Park and
to pursue the anthropology programme regarding the resident native
population. The Committee also wished to bring the Peruvian
authorities' attention to the need for a rural development project
in the buffer zone of the Park.
*[8]
The Cathedral, the Alcazar 383 Rev. Spain C(i)(ii)(iii)
and the Archivo de Indias (vi)
in Seville
Nemrut Dag 448 Turkey C(i)(iii)(iv)
The Committee took note of the undertaking of the representative of
Turkey that the archaeological state of the site would be respected
during the works foreseen in the next few years.
Blenheim Palace 425 United Kingdom C(ii)(iv)
City of Bath 428 " C(i)(ii)(iv)
Hadrian's Wall 430 " C(ii)(iii)(iv)
Palace of Westminster, 426 " C(i)(ii)(iv)
Abbey of Westminster
and Saint Margaret's
Church
Chaco Culture National 353 Rev. United States C(iii)
Historical Park of America
Monticello and University 442 " C(i)(iv)(vi)
of Virginia in Charlottesville
Hawaii Volcanoes 409 " N(ii)
National Park
The Committee wished to encourage the Park authorities to continue
their commendable work on geological research and on the control of
exotic species.
Kilimanjaro National 403 United Republic N(iii)
Park of Tanzania
The Committee recommended that the Tanzanian authorities pursue
plans for extending the Park to include more areas of montane
forests and to continue their efforts to strengthen protective
measures. In particular, the Committee requested that a management
plan be prepared which would improve the effective management of
the park. The representative of Tanzania informed the Committee
that he would report on progress at the next session of the Bureau.
B. Deferred nominations
a) The Committee endorsed the recommendations of the Bureau, and
decided to defer the examination of the following nominations:
*[9]
Panda Reserves 435 China (People's Rep. of)
Cathedral "Unserer 418 Germany (Fed. Rep. of)
Lieben Frau" in Freiburg
The Gorge of Samaria 406 Greece
National Park
Ostia antica, Porto and 397 Italy
the Isola Sacra
Patzcuaro Lake Cultural 413 Mexico
Zone
Bat Necropolis 434 Oman
Old City of Salamanca 381 Rev. Spain
The Committee noted that the complementary file on Salamanca
presented by the Spanish authorities responded satisfactorily to
the requests formulated by the Bureau. The Committee decided to
reconsider this site at its next session, when it had examined the
results of the comparative studies on the university towns of the
Middle Ages and the Renaissance requested by the Bureau.
Sinharala Forest Reserve 182 Sri Lanka
Ecclesiastical sites of 427 United Kingdom
Lough Erne
New Lanark 429 "
Pu'uhonua o'Honaunau 443 United States of America
National Historical
Park
b) Furthermore, the Committee decided to defer the examination of
the following nominations:
Cerro Colorado 408 Argentina
The Committee deferred its decision on this nomination in order to
give ICOMOS the opportunity to make a further evaluation of this
property.
*[10]
Archaeological Park of 396 Italy
Selinunte
The Committee deferred the examination of this property until
additional information on the plans for the archaeological park had
been received.
Castel del Monte 398 "
The Committee noted that the Italian Government had not yet given
assurances regarding the protection of the landscape which
surrounds Castel del Monte and which is an integral part of the
site.
Tongariro National Park 421 New Zealand
The Committee recognized the value of this site in meeting the
natural criteria (ii) and (iii) but wished that this nomination be
deferred until the New Zealand authorities have completed the new
management plan which should give particular attention to placing
limits on ski developments and to better reflecting the Maori
cultural values as part of the management concept of the site.
Lake District National Park 422 United Kingdom
The Committee wished to leave open its decision on this nomination
until it had further clarified its position regarding the
inscription of cultural landscapes.
C. Cultural and Natural properties which the Committee decided
not to inscribe on the World Heritage List.
National Nature 436 China (People's Rep. of)
Conservation Area of the
Middle and Upper Proterozoic
Sequences: Jixian.
The Committee recognized the geological importance of this site
within China but did not consider that it met the criteria for
inscription on the World Heritage List.
Port of Khor Rori 431 Oman
Although the Committee recognized the importance of the "incense
road" in intercontinental exchanges since antiquity, it considered
that, in its present state, the nomination concerning the site of
Khor Rori did not fulfil the criteria for inscription on the World
Heritage List.
*[11]
Sur al-Luwatiya, the 432 "
Historic Centre of Matrah
Although the Committee recognized the value of the Historic Centre
of Matrah for the heritage of the Sultanate of Oman, it considered
that the nomination did not fulfil the criteria for inscription on
the World Heritage List.
Dalt Vila (Ibiza) 417 Spain
Although the Committee recognized the historical value of this site
in the Balearic Islands, it considered that the material evidence
of its multi-millenial past was not sufficient to justify
inscription on the World Heritage List.
With respect to the last three cultural sites mentioned above, the
Committee stated that it would be willing to take into
consideration any new nomination prepared in consultation with
ICOMOS, if new elements were presented which would warrant the
inscription of these sites on the World Heritage List.
10. The representative of the United States of America referred to
paragraph 29 of the "operational Guidelines for the implementation
of the World Heritage Convention" which stipulates that the
examination of new towns of the 20th century "should be deferred
until all the traditional historic towns which represent the most
vulnerable part of the heritage of mankind, have been entered on
the World Heritage List". In view of this provision, she stated the
opposition of her delegation to the inscription of Brasilia. The
representatives of Canada and of India also expressed their concern
about the inscription of a new town, given the above-mentioned
provisions of the Operational Guidelines.
11. The question of inscribing traditional villages gave rise to a
debate and several Committee members felt that it should be further
studied in order to guide the Committee as to the policy to be
followed in this matter.
VIII. MONITORING THE STATUS OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES
INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
A. Cultural properties.
12. The Chairman informed the Committee that, in accordance with
the request of the Committee at its 10th session, a working group
of the Bureau had been set up to examine the problems raised by the
establishment of a system to monitor the state of conservation of
cultural properties included in the World Heritage List. The
working group had proposed the principles of the system and the
procedure to be followed, and had, furthermore, drawn up two draft
questionnaires. The Chairperson of the working group specified that
the first questionnaire would be addressed to all the States
Parties concerned. Subsequently, the Secretariat would, if
necessary, ask for further details by means of the second
questionnaire. She also drew the attention of the Committee in
*[12] particular to paragraphs 12, 15 and 16 of the document SC-
87/CONF.005/5.
13. The working group was congratulated on the proposed system
which gave rise to a wide exchange of views. Emphasis was placed on
the need to ensure that States were the primary source of
information, on the need for the Committee to have objective
information at its disposal and on the fact that the system should
be considered by the States as an incentive to conserve their
listed sites and not as a means of control. Certain speakers
requested that the "reliable sources" of information mentioned in
paragraph 14 of the document mentioned above be clearly defined. It
was furthermore suggested that ICOMOS should be more closely
associated with the proposed system. There was also some discussion
on the composition of the focal points referred to in paragraph 19
of this document. Certain aspects of the proposed system gave rise
to reservations on its complexity and on the fact that it was not
adapted to the needs of States. One member of the Committee
underlined the fact that the date of 31 March foreseen in paragraph
8 was somewhat unrealistic. Another speaker insisted that the
system should be implemented at first on a trial basis. The
Chairman summarized the discussion, stating that he had detected a
definite interest in implementing the system as proposed by the
working group, at least for an experimental period, following which
the necessary adjustments could be made. The Committee so decided.
14. The Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage also drew the
Committee's attention to the problems which could result from the
very brief period of time foreseen for the presentation of replies
to the first questionnaire and to the number of sites to be
examined each year which now amounted to 50. In accordance with the
procedure foreseen, the Committee should draw up the list of the
first fifty cultural properties which should be monitored in 1988
(1). The Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage then
proceeded to present those cases in which the Secretariat had
recently intervened concerning World Heritage cultural properties
for which the Secretariat had received information on the state of
conservation. The Secretariat had received replies which indicated
that the States had taken the necessary measures to respond to the
problems raised. Such was the case for Angra do Heroismo in the
Azores and the Monastery of the Hieronymites in Lisbonne, Portugal,
Giza in Egypt, Auschwitz in Poland and for Cregneash and Stonehenge
in the United Kingdom. With respect to the Old Town of Quebec in
Canada, Göreme in Turkey, the town of Olinda in Brazil and the
Monastery of St. Hydra in Egypt, the Secretariat was in contact
with the authorities concerned. She furthermore informed the
Committee of a report received from the authorities of the Federal
Republic of Germany providing indications of restoration work on
Würzburg Residence and the Church of Wies.
-----------------------
1 The list of the first fifty cultural properties inscribed on
the World Heritage List was later brought to the attention of
the Committee - see Annex II.
15. The representative of Brazil informed the Committee of the
creation of a park between Olinda and Recife which would ensure
that the zone between the two towns remained non-aedificandi. He
*[13] also brought to the attention of the Committee the problems
of land subsidence, of dense traffic and increase in tourism to
which the town of Olinda was exposed. He added that the authorities
of his country were solving these problems. Furthermore, he
requested that the Secretariat communicate to the Permanent
Delegations any information received with respect to the state of
conservation of World Heritage sites. The representative of Canada
informed the Committee that the Director of the Cultural Heritage
of her country had been in contact with the local authorities
concerning the two projects which were giving rise to concern in
the old town of Quebec and indicated that the representative of her
country would report on this question at the next session of the
Bureau. The observer from the Federal Republic of Germany referred
to the report of an expert from ICOMOS on the problems of integrity
which had been raised in connection with Speyer Cathedral; precious
advice had been given in this report for which he thanked ICOMOS.
B. Natural properties.
16. The representative of IUCN reported on the status of
conservation of twelve natural World Heritage properties and made
a statement on the poaching of rhinoceros. A summary of this
presentation was available as information document SC-
87/CONF.005/INF 1.
17. The Committee noted with satisfaction that the situation in two
of the natural sites inscribed on the List of the World Heritage in
Danger - namely Djoudj National Park (Senegal) and Ngorongoro
Conservation Area (Tanzania) - had considerably improved in the
last year and that IUCN would be proposing that they be removed
from the List of World Heritage in Danger in the next two years.
The situation of Garamba National Park (Zaire) was also improving
but was still critical.
18. The Committee requested its chairman to write to the
authorities concerned for the following natural sites mentioned in
the IUCN document in order that progress reports could be submitted
to the Committee at its next session : Western Tasmania National
Parks (Australia); Mt.Nimba (Cote d'Ivoire/Guinea); Machu Picchu
Historic Sanctuary (Peru); Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal);
Selous Game Reserve (Tanzania);
19. The representative of Tunisia informed the Committee that a
Unesco/World Heritage consultant was currently reviewing the
situation of Ichkeul National Park which had been mentioned in the
IUCN document: he stated that his country would certainly nominate
this site to the List of World Heritage in Danger if this was
recommended in the consultant's report.
20. The Committee noted with satisfaction the effects of the
Yugoslav authorities to reduce water pollution levels in the
Skocjan caves.
21. The Committee noted the very serious problems of poaching in
the Mana Pools Complex (Zimbabwe) and noted that the procedure had
been started by the Zimbabwe authorities to nominate this property
on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
*[14]
22. The Committee took note of the IUCN statement on the poaching
of rhinoceros in general, and of the declaration of the
representative of the Yemen Arab Republic contesting views
expressed by IUCN saying that these views did not correspond to the
real situation and did not look into the problem in its globality.
The Committee requested the Secretariat to continue its cooperation
with the Secretariat of the Convention on the International Trade
of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and
particularly to investigate what joint measures could be taken to
reinforce the protection against poaching in certain World Heritage
sites.
IX. SITUATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND AND BUDGET FOR 1988
23. The Committee examined document SC-87/CONF.005/6 and took note
of the explanations given in the addendum. It noted that as at 30
November 1987 the cash in hand amounted to $2,490,720 and that
since that date, a voluntary contribution of $200,000 had been
received from a State Party, bringing the total amount of the cash
in hand to $2,690,720.
24. Given this financial situation, the Committee adopted the
following budget for 1988:
Activity Amount
_____________________________________________________________
Preparatory assistance 100,000
and regional studies
Technical cooperation 700,000
Training 500,000
Emergency assistance 200,000
Promotional activities, 150,000
information and monitoring
Advisory services (IUCN $103,600) 280,000
(ICOMOS $176,400)
Temporary assistance to 260,000
the Secretariat
_____________
2,190,000
3% Contingency funds 65,700
_____________
2,255,700
Reserve (16% of total) 435,020
_____________
TOTAL 2,690,720
=========
*[15]
X. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
25. The Committee examined the requests presented in document SC-
87/CONF.005/7. The Committee noted that the Bureau had met on 9
December 1987 to consider these requests and, in accordance with
the procedure set out in paragraphs 69 to 91 of the Operational
Guidelines, had approved the requests amounting to not more than
$30,000. The Committee decided to approve the other requests taking
account of the Bureau's recommendations.
The requests approved are as follows:
Preparatory assistance
China (People's Rep. of) for drawing up
safeguarding plans for the cultural sites
inscribed on the World Heritage List. $25,000
Total $25,000
Technical cooperation
Tassili N'Ajjer (Algeria) for equipment and
consultant services to prepare a large scale
project to implement the management plan. $17,000
Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon) as a contribution to
the adoption and implementation of the draft
management plan. $30,000
Petra (Jordan) as a contribution towards research
work on weathering and subsequent protection of
the property $50,000
Selous Game Reserve (Tanzania) for equipment for
anti-poaching measures $50,000
Istanbul (Turkey) for equipment. $30,000
Durmitor National Park (Yugoslavia) for equipment
for research on forest die-back and related
conservation problems $50,000
Khami Ruins National Monument (Zimbabwe)
for safeguarding work. $25,000
_______
Total $252,000
Training
Brazil: for training in the conservation and
restoration of historic areas $40,000
*[16]
China: as a contribution to the programme for
the training of natural heritage conservation
specialists $30,000
For a study tour in Cote d'Ivoire for African
francophone students at the Montpellier training
course on forest and fauna protection $30,000
Haiti: for training courses at the National
History Park-Citidel, Sans Souci, Ramiers $25,000
Mexico: for the training of specialists
responsible for the conservation of cultural
sites included in the World Heritage List. $42,000
Total $167,000
========
Emergency assistance
Ecuador, Quito: for the urgent work required
for the consolidation of monuments damaged
by the earthquake. $70,000
Total $70,000
=======
XI. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES
26. The Committee took note of document SC-87/CONF.006/8 presenting
the promotional activities undertaken in 1987 and those foreseen
for 1988. The Committee congratulated the Secretariat on the work
and emphasized the need to expand this promotion programme.
27. It was recalled that States Parties have a responsibility in
strengthening promotional activities. Several members of the
Committee mentioned the activities undertaken in their respective
countries, such as the production of stamps or pamphlets on world
heritage sites in Yugoslavia and India, or the publication and sale
at news-stands of a series of booklets on world heritage sites in
Brazil, or the printing and the distribution of the folding poster
on the World Heritage Convention in China. The bulletin produced in
the United Kingdom "International Heritage" was also mentioned as
a particularly successful type of promotional material which could
serve as an example to other States Parties.
28. The Committee requested the Secretariat to ensure that there
were close links with the promotion of the international campaigns
to safeguard the cultural heritage. The Committee also suggested
that better use could be made of technical cooperation activities
to make the Convention better known, particularly by systematically
marking equipment provided under technical cooperation with the
World Heritage emblem. It requested the Secretariat to mention how
useful this procedure could be in identifying work carried out
thanks to the Convention.
*[17]
29. The representative of Brazil indicated that there was an error
in the siting of a Brazilian property in the World Heritage folding
brochure and was assured that this would be corrected in the
future.
30. Finally, as concerns the technical cooperation requests for
promotional activities, the Committee accepted the Bureau's
recommendation whereby the Bureau could consider as receivable only
requests aimed at making the Convention better known in general and
not for promoting a specific site, and to grant only amounts not
exceeding $5,000 for such requests. However, amounts up to $10,000
could be granted in exceptional cases on condition that the
Chairman of the Committee gave his approval. The Secretariat was
entrusted with modifying the "Operational Guidelines" to include
these points. In accordance with this decision, the Committee
accepted two requests for technical cooperation submitted by Haiti
for the production of an audio-visual presentation, and by the
People's Republic of China for a contribution to a film on World
Heritage, respectively for $6,000 and $10,000.
XII. NUMBER OF NOMINATIONS
31. Given the high number of nominations and the problems that this
situation might cause for their evaluation and the smooth running
of the work of the Committee, the Bureau had wished that the
Committee examine whether it was suitable - and in which manner -
to eventually envisage a limitation to the number of nominations in
the future. The Committee also expressed its concern that the
examination of nominations had taken up most of the time available
at the expense of the other items on the agenda, particularly
financial matters.
32. Several members of the Committee considered that it was
desirable to keep the World Heritage List, established under the
increasingly popular World Heritage Convention, open to as many
nominations as possible while ensuring quality control and
adherence to the operational guidelines. One view was expressed
that it should be possible to improve the working methods and
procedures of the Committee, particularly for examining nominations
more rapidly and effectively, by providing information on the
categories of nominations already received and the States Parties
concerned.
33. The Committee reviewed the means that could be envisaged for
limiting the number of nominations in the future in as fair as
possible a manner: several ideas were put forward such as limiting
the maximum of nominations to be examined each year to say 25 or 30
giving priority to previously deferred nominations; the strict
application of criteria; the review and updating of tentative lists
particularly for cultural sites; the possibility of classifying
nominations by types giving preference to nominations of sites
corresponding to themes which were under or not represented on the
World Heritage List; calling on States Parties to voluntarily limit
the number of nominations submitted each year, etc.
34. A member of the Committee suggested that although the
Convention did not oblige the States Parties to draw up lists of
properties of *[18] national or regional importance, such lists
could possibly be brought to the attention of the Committee for its
information.
35. The Committee recognized that the question of the number and
type of nominations was a complex issue which had already been
raised at its previous sessions and which would need to be studied
in some depth. The Committee decided to establish a working group,
and the Chairman set out its terms of reference as follows: to
review all the sites already inscribed on the World Heritage List;
to review the tentative lists already received; to review ways and
means of ensuring a rigorous application of the criteria
established by the Committee; to review ways and means of better
managing the agenda of the Committee sessions. The proposals of the
working group on the above questions will be submitted to the
Bureau at its next session.
36. The following States Parties indicated that they wished to
participate in the working group, under the chairmanship of Sri
Lanka: Australia, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Mexico, Tunisia. The
working group would remain open to other members of the Committee
who wished also to take part.
XIII. PROCEDURE FOR EXTENDING WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTIES
37. When examining the proposal to extend Kakadu National Park
(Australia), the Committee recognized that there were no
indications in the "Operational Guidelines" for States Parties in
proposing extensions to sites inscribed on the World Heritage List.
The Committee therefore requested the Secretariat to incorporate
such indications, particularly concerning the documentation to be
made available to enable the Bureau and the Committee to examine
such proposals.
XIV. DATE AND PLACE OF THE 12th SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
COMMITTEE
38. The representative from Brazil recalled that his country had on
several previous occasions invited the Committee to host one of its
sessions in Brasilia. Now that this property was inscribed on the
World Heritage List, the Brazilian authorities wished to reiterate
their invitation and to host the 12th session of the Committee in
Brasilia in 1988.
39. The Committee thanked the Brazilian representative for the
invitation made on behalf of his country. Many members of the
Committee felt that, although most intergovernmental Unesco
meetings should be held at Unesco Headquarters in Paris, there was
a real advantage in holding alternate meetings of the World
Heritage Committee outside Paris since this gave an excellent
opportunity to make the work of the Convention better known in the
host country and region. Furthermore, the members of the Committee
could have the chance to visit certain World Heritage properties
and see international assistance projects at work.
40. The disadvantages of holding the next Committee session outside
Unesco Headquarters were expressed by several Committee members who
*[19] recognized that certain States Members of the Committee would
face additional difficulties in ensuring their participation at a
session away from Paris. In addition, the costs for the Secretariat
in the 24 C/5 only covered the amounts foreseen for meetings at
Unesco Headquarters. In this connection, the Brazilian
representative informed the Committee that his government was
willing to cover the additional costs for the Secretariat.
41. The Committee, taking account of the advantages and
disadvantages outlined above, accepted the invitation of the
Brazilian authorities to hold the 12th session of the Committee in
Brasilia on the condition that an agreement could be made between
Brazil and Unesco so that all additional costs for such a meeting
away from Headquarters would be met by the host country. The
provisional date for the session would be from 5-9 December 1988.
XV REPRESENTATION ON THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
42. The representative of Algeria noted that the present
composition of the World Heritage Committee was somewhat imbalanced
in terms of geographical representation, with a particular lack of
representation of African States Parties. This meant that there was
a resulting imbalance in the representation of cultural regions.
The Algerian representative suggested that the Bureau and the
Committee should re-examine the voting procedure for the General
Assembly of States Parties.
43. The Committee agreed that there was a need to ensure an
equitable representation of the different regions and cultures of
the world, as is stated in Article 8, paragraph 1 of the
Convention. It requested the Secretariat to present the Bureau and
the Committee with proposals which would respond to this need and
which could eventually be adopted by the 7th General Assembly of
States Parties in 1989.
XVI CLOSING OF THE SESSION.
44. The Chairman informed the Committee that he had met with Mr.
Federico Mayor, Director-General of Unesco, on 11 December 1987 and
had highlighted the importance of the work of the Convention as
well as the need that Unesco provides a core of permanent
professional staff positions to ensure continuity and efficiency in
the work of the World Heritage Secretariat.
45. The Chairman thanked all those who had contributed to the
Committee's work and the representative of Sri Lanka, on behalf of
the other members of the Committee, thanked the Chairman in turn
for his efficient leadership. The Chairman then announced the
closure of the session.
----------------------------------------------------------------
*[Annex I/1] SC-87/CONF.005/ANNEX I
December 1987
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
Eleventh Session / Onzième session
Unesco Headquarters, Paris, 7-11 December 1987
Siège de l'Unesco, 7-11 décembre 1987
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
1. STATES MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE / ETATS MEMBRES DU COMITE
ALGERIA / ALGERIE
M Noureddine GAOUAOU
Deuxième secrétaire
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
AUSTRALIA / AUSTRALIE
H.E. Mr H.C. Mott
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mr W. Nicholls
Director, World Heritage Section
Federal Department Arts and Environment
Mr D. Gillespie
Assistant Director
Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service
Mr D. M. Macintyre
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
BRAZIL / BRESIL
S.E. M Josué MONTELLO
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco
M Augusto SILVA TELLES
Consultant Technique du Secrétariat
du Patrimoine historique et artistique
M Luis Filipe MACEDO SOARES
Ministre, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
M Sergio FLORENCIO
Conseiller, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
*[Annex I/2]
M Joas Carlos SOUZA-GOMES
Conseiller, Délégation permanente auDrès de l'Unesco
Mme Isis MARTINS DE ANDRADE
Premier secrétaire, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
BULGARIA / BULGARIE
Mme Magdalina STANTSCHEVA
Professeur adjoint à l'Université de Sofia
CANADA
Mr J.D. COLLINSON
Assistant Deputy Minister
Environment Canada
Ms Christina CAMERON
Director-General
National Historic Parks and Sites
Environment Canada
CUBA
Mme Marta ARJONA
Directeur de Patrimoine culturel
FRANCE
M Jean Pierre BADY
Directeur du Patrimoine
Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication
M Jean-Pierre BOYER
Conseiller, Commission nationale Française pour l'Unesco
Mme Anita DAVIDENKOFF
Ministère des Affaires étrangères
Mme Muriel DE RAISSAC
Direction de patrimoine
Ministère de la Culture
Mlle Françoise DESCARPENTRIS
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
M F. ENAUD
Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication
Direction du Patrimoine
Mlle Patricia MAUGAIN
Ministère de l'Environnement
M Alain MEGRET
Ministère de l'Environnement
Direction de la protection de la nature
Chargé des affaires internationales
M Gilbert SIMON
Secrétaire général, Comité MAB-France
*[Annex I/3]
GREECE / GRECE
Mr Yannis TZEDAKIS
Director of Antiquities
Ministry of Culture
Mme Androniki MILTIADOU
Conseiller, Délégation permanente augrès de l'Unesco
INDIA / INDE
H.E. Ms Arundhati GHOSE
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mr Harsh Vardhan SHRINGLA
Second Secretary
Permanent Delegation to Unesco
Mr Jagdeop KAPOOR
Permanent Delegation to Unesco
ITALY / ITALIE
Mme L. VLAD BORELLI
Inspecteur Central
Ministère des Biens culturels
Mme Marina MISITANO
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
Mr Raffaele BRIGLI
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
LEBANON / LIBAN
M Joseph SAYEGH
Attaché culturel, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
MEXICO / MEXIQUE
S.E. M Miguel LEON-PORTILLA
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco
Mme Sonia LOMBARDO de RUIZ
Directrice, Monuments historiques
Institut national d'Anthropologie et d'Histoire (INAH)
M Salvador DIAZ-BERRIO FERNANDEZ Directeur, Projets techniques
Institut national d'Anthropologie et d'Histoire (INAH-SEP)
M Jorge Alberto MANRIQUE
Président Comité mexicain de l'ICOMOS
Mme Guadalupe UGARTE de BERNARD
Deuxième secrétaire
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
*[Annex I/4]
PAKISTAN
H.E. Mr Niaz A. NAIK
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mr Ahmed Nabi KHAN
Director General of Archaeology
Mr Haroon SHAUKAT
First Secretary
Permanent Delegation to Unesco
SRI LANKA
H.E. Mr Ananda W. P. GURUGE
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to Unesco
TUNISIA / TUNISIE
M Adnan ZMERLI
Délégé permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
M Azedine BESCHAOUCH
Maitre de recherches archéologiques
Directeur général de la Bibliothèque nationale
Mme Sophie ZAOUCHE
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
TURKEY / TURQUIE
Ms Aysegul PEKDEMIR
Chief of Section, Specific Projects
General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums
M Ali Engin OBA
Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA / REPUBLIQUE UNIE DE TANZANIE
Mr Joseph A. T. MUWOWO
Minister Plenipotentiary
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mr Afraeli MOSE
Head, Research Department
Ministry of Community Development and Culture
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE
Ms Susan RECCE
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks
Department of the lnterior
*[Annex I/5]
Ms Sharon CLEARY
International Environmental Officer
State Department
Mr Richard COOK
International Affairs Officer
National Park Service
Department of the Interior
YEMEN ARAB REPUBLIC / REPUBLIC ARABE DU YEMEN
S.E. M Ahmed SAYYAD
Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco
II. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY /
ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT AVEC UN STATUT CONSULTATIF
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS) / CONSEIL
INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES
Mr Helmut STELZER
Secretary General
M Léon PRESSOUYRE
Professeur à l'Université de Paris I
Mr Colin KAISER
Director of International Secretariat
Mme Florence PORTELETTE
Documentaliste
INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL
RESOURCES (IUCN) / UNION INTERNATIONALE POUR LA CONSERVATION DE
LA NATURE ET DE SES RESSOURCES (UICN)
Mr James Thorsell
Executive Officer
Commission on National Parks and other Protected Arens (CNPPA)
III. OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS
A. OTHER STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION /
AUTRES ETATS PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL
ARGENTINA / ARGENTINE
H.E. Mme Elsa KELLY
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of Argentina to Unesco
BOLIVIA / BOLIVIE
M Jaime APARICIO
Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
BURKINA FASO
M Theodule DA HOUONNE
Chef, Service des sites et monuments
*[Annex I/6]
CAMEROON / CAMEROUN
M Jean NGOG NJE
Directeur, Ecole de Faune, Garoua
M M. MBELLA
Conseiller, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
CHILE / CHILI
M Jorge MORA BRUGERE
Conseiller, Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
CHINA (People's Rep. of) / CHINE (République pop. de)
Ms Shuyun SHI
Deputy Director, National Commission of Unesco
COSTA RICA
S.E. Mme Vivienne RIVERA DE SOLIS
Ambassador, Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco
Mme Iris BILLAULT-LEIVA
Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
Mme Yvette RICKEBUSCH
Premier secrétaire, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
COTE D'IVOIRE
M Etienne MIEZAN EZO
Conseiller, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
CYPRUS / CHYPRE
Mr Christos CASSIMATIS
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
ECUADOR / EQUATEUR
Mr Miguel CARBO
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
FINLAND / FINLANDE
M Iivo SALMI
Conseiller, Délégué permanent adJoint auprès de l'Unesco
GERMANY (Fed. Rep. of) / ALLEMAGNE (Rép. féd. de)
M Hans CASPARY
Conservateur des Monuments historiques
GUATEMALA
M Fernando SESENNA
Ministre, Délégué permanent adjoint
*[Annex I/7]
HOLY SEE / SAINT-SIEGE
Mgr Lorenzo FRANA
Observateur Permanent auprès de l'Unesco
HUNGARY / HONGRIE
Mr Laszlo DALANYI
Head of Department, Ministry of Building
Mr Jozsef PAPP
Head of Section, Ministry of Building
IRAN (Islamic Republic of) / IRAN (République islamique de)
M Abbas Ali ASGHARI
Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
IRAQ / IRAK
M Munir TAHA
Directeur de la Division des études et de la recherche
Département du patrimoine et archéologie
JORDAN / JORDANIE
Mr Zougan OBIEDAT
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
NIGERIA
M S. ALKALI
Conseiller, Délégué permanent adioint auprès de l'Unesco
OMAN
H.E. Mr Musa Bin Jaffar Bin HASSAN
Permanent Delegate to Unesco
PANAMA
Mr Jorge PATIÑO
Third Secretary, Permanent Delegation to Unesco
PERU / PEROU
Mr Marco CARREON
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mlle Lissette NALVARTE S.
Troisième secrétaire, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
SPAIN / ESPAGNE
M Carlos BAZTAN
Architecte, Ministère de Culture
M José MERINO DE CACERES
Architecte, Ministère de Culture
*[Annex I/8]
SWITZERLAND / SUISSE
Mme Anne BAUTY
Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco
THAILAND / THAILANDE
Mme Srinoi POVATONG
Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco
Mme Amphan OTRAKUL SALES
Permanent Delegation to Unesco
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND /
ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET D'IRLANDE DU NORD
Mr Peter DENTON
Heritage Sponsorship Division
Department of Environment
Mr John TOOTHILL
National Park Officer, Lake District
YUGOSLAVIA / YOUGOSLAVIE
M Matjan PUC Conseiller,
Institut pour la protection des biens culturels et de
l'environnement naturel de la République Socialiste de Slovénie
M AIbin DEBEVEC
Directeur de l'Organisation de tourisme
Portoroz, de Sezana
M Pribislav MARINKOVIC
Professeur à la Faculté des sciences forestières,
Université de Belgrade
M Milenko STIJEOVIC
Directeur du Parc national de Durmitor, Titograd
B. NON-STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION /
ETATS NON PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL
GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE DEMOCRATIQUE ALLEMANDE
M Andreas GREIM
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS /
ORGANISATIONS INTERGOUVERNEMENTALES
ARAB EDUCATIONAL, CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATION /
ORGANISATION ARABE POUR L'EDUCATION, LA CULTURE ET LA SCIENCE
(ALESCO)
M F. AMMAR
Deuxième secrétaire
Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco
*[Annex I/9]
INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK /
BANQUE INTER-AMERICAINE DE DEVELOPPEMENT
Mr Rod CHAPMAN
Information and Press Officer
European Office
WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME / PROGRAMME ALIMENTAIRE MONDIAL
Mr B. E. MATOKO
Unesco-WFP Cooperative Programme
D. INTERNATIONAL NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION /
ORGANISATION INTERNATIONALE NON-GOUVERNEMENTALE
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS (ICOM) / CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL
DES MUSEES
Mr P. CARDON
Secretary General
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND / FONDS MONDIAL POUR LA NATURE
Mr James THORSELL
Executive Officer, IUCN-CNPPA
IV. UNESCO SECRETARIAT / SECRETARIAT DE L'UNESCO
Mr A. R. KADDOURA
Assistant Director-General for Science
Mr B. von DROSTE
Director
Division of Ecological Sciences
Ms A. RAIDL
Director
Division of Cultural Heritage
Ms M. van VLIET
Division of Cultural Heritage
Ms J. ROBERTSON VERNHES
Division of Ecological Sciences
Mr N. ISHWARAN
Division of Ecological Sciences
Ms M. JARDIN
Division of Ecological Sciences
Ms C. LYARD
Division of Cultural Heritage
Ms P.C. BENEDICT
Division of Cultural Heritage
----------------------------------------------------------------
*[Annex II/1] SC-87/CONF.005/9 - Annex II
THE FIRST FIFTY CULTURAL SITES INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
PROPERTIES INSCRIBED IN 1978
Name of property State Party
---------------- -----------
L'Anse aux Meadows National Historic Park Canada
City of Quito Ecuador
Rock-hewn Churches, Lalibela Ethiopia
Aachen Cathedral Germany (Federal
Républic of)
Cracow's Historic Centre Poland
Wieliczka Salt Mine "
Island of Gorée Senegal
Mesa Verde United States of
America
PROPERTIES INSCRIBED IN 1979
Boyana Church Bulgaria
Madara Rider "
Thracian tomb of Kazanlak "
Rock-hewn churches of Ivanovo "
Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid
fields from Giza to Dahshur Egypt
Ancient Thebes with its Necropolis "
Nubian monuments from Abu Simbel to Philae "
Islamic Cairo "
Abu Mena "
Fasil Ghebbi, Gondar Region Ethiopia
Mont-Saint-Michel and its Bay France
Chartres Cathedral "
Palace and Park of Versailles "
Vézelay, Church and Hill "
Decorated Grottoes of the Vézère Valley "
*[Annex II/2]
Forts and castles, Volta Greater Accra,
Central and Western Regions Ghana
Tikal National Park Guatemala
Antigua Guatemala "
Tchogha Zanbil Iran (Islamic
Republic of)
Persepolis "
Meidan Emam, Esfahan "
Rock drawings in Valcamonica Italy
Kathmandu Valley Nepal
Urnes Stave Church Norway
Bryggen "
Auschwitz Concentration Camp Poland
Ancient City of Damascus Syrian Arab
Republic
Medina of Tunis Tunisia
Site of Carthage "
Amphitheatre of E1 Djem "
Independence Hall United States of
America
Old City of Dubrovnik Yugoslavia
Stari Ras and Sopocani "
Historical complex of Split with the
Palace of Diocletian "
Ohrid region with its cultural and
historical aspect and its natural environment "
Natural and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor "
PROPERTIES INSCRIBED IN 1980
Al Qal'a of Beni Hammad Algeria
Historic town of Ouro Preto Brazil
Paphos Cyprus
Lower Valley of the Awash Ethiopia
Tiya "
Aksum "