UNESCO World Heritage

The history of the World Heritage Convention begins in Egypt. In the 1960s, the construction of the Aswan High Dam threatened to submerge the 3,000-year-old temples of Abu Simbel under water. In response, UNESCO launched a major relief campaign on March 8, 1960 to relocate the rock temples to a site 65 meters higher. Fifty countries were willing to provide the financial and technical resources needed. Through a spectacular show of solidarity, 80 million US dollars were raised. Between 1963 and 1968, the temples were dismantled, moved, and reconstructed.

This unprecedented rescue operation highlighted a crucial point: there are places whose significance is so great that they do not belong solely to the state in whose territory they are located. If the world loses these invaluable assets through decay or destruction, it diminishes the heritage of all humanity. Consequently, in 1972, the member states of UNESCO adopted the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) to safeguard sites of “outstanding universal value.”

The World Heritage Convention is the most successful international instrument for the protection of cultural and natural heritage. Through international cooperation, it safeguards significant sites as the shared heritage of humanity. It promotes the preservation of cultural and natural sites worldwide and raises awareness of the value of both one’s own heritage and the heritage of other cultures. The concept of World Heritage reflects a modern understanding of culture and fosters dialogue and cooperation. In this way, the World Heritage Convention also contributes to cross-cultural understanding and helps build trust between states.

There are ten criteria for World Heritage sites, of which at least one must be met. A fundamental requirement is that a site possesses “outstanding universal value” (OUV). This forms the core of every World Heritage site and defines why the site is significant to all humanity and therefore worthy of protection and preservation.

Cultural World Heritage sites are recognized if they represent “a masterpiece of human creative genius” or have outstanding importance for the development of architecture, urban planning, or landscape design.

Natural World Heritage sites include “exceptional natural phenomena” that provide extraordinary evidence of Earth’s history and the evolution of life, as well as natural landscapes of global significance for the conservation of biological diversity and the protection of endangered species.

It is not UNESCO that proposes or designates a site; rather, it is the State Party in whose territory the site is located. The application for a site to be inscribed on the World Heritage List is therefore submitted by the State Party.

After submission, the nominated site — provided the nomination dossier meets the required criteria — is evaluated by experts from the Advisory Bodies. These experts provide the necessary scientific knowledge for the practical implementation of the World Heritage Convention and advise the World Heritage Committee. They assess whether the sites proposed by the member states meet the criteria set out in the Convention.

The final decision on the inscription of a site on the World Heritage List is made by the World Heritage Committee.

The World Heritage Committee is the key body responsible for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. The Committee meets once a year and consists of representatives from 21 States Parties to the Convention, elected by the General Assembly for a term of six years.

The Committee determines the use of the World Heritage Fund and provides financial assistance to States Parties upon request. It has the final say on whether a property is inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee also reviews reports on the state of conservation of inscribed sites and calls on States Parties to take action if sites are not properly managed. Additionally, it decides on the inscription or removal of properties from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The World Heritage Centre in Paris serves as the permanent secretariat of the World Heritage Committee and is organizationally part of UNESCO’s Culture Sector in Paris. Its role is to implement, document, and publish the decisions made by the Committee.

As the Secretariat, it organizes the Committee’s meetings, receives nomination files for the World Heritage List, coordinates the monitoring of World Heritage sites, and manages regular reporting. It also oversees the World Heritage Fund, coordinates international assistance projects, and supports States Parties in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

The inscription process — from the submission of a nomination to the decision at the World Heritage Committee session — takes at least 18 months.

In advance, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre asks States Parties to submit national tentative lists that include sites proposed for nomination. Applications must be submitted by the cut-off date of February 1 for consideration in the following year.

On behalf of the World Heritage Committee, experts from the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) evaluate the complete nomination files. Based on their recommendations, the World Heritage Committee, composed of representatives from 21 States Parties, makes the final decision on whether a site is inscribed on the World Heritage List.

The Committee is not bound by the recommendations of ICOMOS and IUCN and may sometimes decide differently. Decisions are ideally made by consensus, but a vote can occur in cases of disagreement, requiring a two-thirds majority.

Each State Party is encouraged to maintain a tentative list. This list includes sites that the state considers to be cultural and/or natural heritage of outstanding universal value and therefore suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List. A site must be on the tentative list for at least one year before a nomination for its inscription on the World Heritage List can be submitted to the World Heritage Committee.

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee has four options when making a decision:

1. Inscription – The Committee recognizes the site’s outstanding universal value and decides to inscribe it on the World Heritage List.
2. Non-inscription – The Committee rejects the site due to a lack of outstanding universal value. This permanently excludes the site from nomination.
3. Referral of nomination – The Committee acknowledges the site’s outstanding universal value but refers the nomination back to the State Party, requesting additional information. In this case, the nomination can be resubmitted to the Committee for a final decision the following year.
4. Deferral of nomination – The nomination is returned to the State Party for comprehensive revision. Once the revised nomination is resubmitted on time to the World Heritage Centre, a schedule is determined in consultation with the Advisory Bodies, considering the State Party’s waiting list, for the site to be presented to the Committee again after an 18-month evaluation cycle.

The World Heritage Convention names three international non-governmental or intergovernmental organizations that advise the World Heritage Committee. ICOMOS, IUCN, and ICCROM are networks of experts who evaluate nominations, prepare technical reports, and carry out international monitoring and assistance missions.

IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) is an international non-governmental organization that provides the Committee with technical assessments of natural properties and prepares reports on the state of conservation of inscribed World Heritage sites through its global network of experts. Founded in 1948 and headquartered in Gland, Switzerland, IUCN serves as the advisory body for Natural World Heritage.

ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) provides the Committee with evaluations of cultural and mixed properties proposed for inscription. It is an international NGO founded in 1965, with its Secretariat in Paris. ICOMOS comprises 28 international scientific committees that focus on the preservation and restoration of cultural monuments.

ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) is an intergovernmental organization based in Rome, established in 1956 to promote the preservation of all forms of cultural heritage worldwide. ICCROM provides member states with the best tools, knowledge, skills, and frameworks to safeguard cultural heritage in all its forms for the benefit of humanity. Its work also contributes to the ecological, social, and economic sustainability of communities.

If a State Party plans to extend a World Heritage site, the guidelines distinguish two cases:

1. For a minor modification that does not significantly affect the World Heritage site, the State Party must submit the request to the World Heritage Centre in Paris by February 1. The World Heritage Committee then decides at its annual summer session whether to approve the request.
2. If a State Party wishes to significantly modify the boundaries of an existing World Heritage site, the proposal must be submitted as a new nomination by February 1. The inscription process — from submission of the extension to the decision at the World Heritage Committee session — takes 18 months.

All States Parties commit to the international community to develop a management plan for the protection and conservation of World Heritage sites located on their territory. The goal is to create tools that ensure the sustainable and conflict-free preservation of the World Heritage.

For the proper conservation of a site, an adequate buffer zone should also be established around it. Through these boundary definitions and the assignment of responsible authorities, the site’s outstanding universal value is safeguarded, for example, against construction and infrastructure projects.

In addition, States Parties report on the condition of their World Heritage sites every six years.

UNESCO points out problems and raises international awareness about the threats to a World Heritage site. In conflict situations, such as the destruction or looting of a site, UNESCO alerts the global community and advocates for solutions through diplomatic channels. It uses its network of experts and partners to document the events and assess the damage.

UNESCO’s interventions have already led to high-level decision-makers recognizing the protection of cultural sites as a matter of humanitarian security, particularly for World Heritage sites threatened by war.

The World Heritage Convention provides only one form of sanction: if a site is threatened by deterioration or mismanagement, the World Heritage Committee may, after careful assessment and consultation with the State Party concerned, decide to inscribe it on the “List of World Heritage in Danger.”

Inclusion on the “Red List” is intended to encourage the international community to provide increased support to the State Party in preserving the World Heritage site. If the condition of the threatened site does not improve and its outstanding universal value is lost, the site can, in extreme cases, be removed from the World Heritage List.

The growing interest in recent years highlights the success of the World Heritage Convention. The World Heritage List is a fascinating map of cultural and natural diversity, human creativity, and historical and regional particularities. The list is intended to represent the most significant testimonies of all cultures and all periods of human history.

Critics sometimes speak of a “inflation” of World Heritage sites, yet UNESCO limits the number of new inscriptions each year. A greater challenge, however, is the imbalance of the list: most World Heritage sites are located in Europe and North America, and there is a disproportionate number of historic city centers and Christian monuments. Underrepresented, by contrast, are, for example, monuments of technological history, natural sites, and cultural landscapes shaped by indigenous peoples in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific region.

In 1994, UNESCO adopted the “Global Strategy” to achieve a geographically and culturally balanced World Heritage List. The strategy gives priority to nominations from countries that were previously underrepresented on the list, aiming to reduce the imbalance between Europe and North America and other world regions.

Since the adoption of the Global Strategy, over 50 additional States have ratified the World Heritage Convention, including numerous African and Eastern European countries as well as many island states in the Pacific. Today, the World Heritage List is much more representative: out of 194 States Parties, 168 are now represented on the list.

Inscription on the World Heritage List is generally not accompanied by direct financial support. However, there is the UNESCO World Heritage Fund, which has an annual budget of about four million euros. The Fund is primarily financed by contributions from the States Parties and mainly benefits poorer countries.

UNESCO also seeks other funding sources, such as donations, and promotes cooperation among States Parties through World Heritage partnerships (for example, the Netherlands Funds-in-Trust). Some States have also established national funding programs.

The World Heritage List is primarily a tool for international understanding and cooperation. At the same time, being designated as a World Heritage site is a special mark of prestige. World Heritage sites are prime tourist attractions, and the title thus holds significant value for tourism promotion.

The costs depend on the financial and personnel capacities of the respective country and therefore vary greatly from one nomination to another. Many States invest in advance in the protection and conservation of a site. Follow-up costs also differ from case to case.

However, it can be generally observed that nominations have become increasingly complex and demanding over the years. For example, the nomination for Aachen Cathedral in 1978 was only a few pages long, and the Hallstatt-Dachstein/Salzkammergut nomination in 1997 comprised 90 pages. Today, a nomination typically consists of around 1,500 pages, including documentation, expert reports, and comparative studies.

Many developing countries can rarely afford this, which continues to result in a disproportionately higher number of European sites being inscribed annually. To address this, experts are increasingly being trained in regions such as Africa, enabling these countries to submit successful World Heritage nominations.

UNESCO aims to emphasize the unifying goals of World Heritage more strongly. In particular, countries that are currently underrepresented on the World Heritage List should receive better international support. Transboundary World Heritage sites should be more actively promoted, and cultural landscapes and industrial monuments should be given greater consideration.

Globally, the challenges are complex: wars and violent conflicts, natural disasters and climate change, migration, and unplanned urban growth require sustainable solutions for World Heritage sites. A 2007 study by the UNESCO World Heritage Centre already demonstrated that climate change continuously impacts World Heritage sites. Natural monuments, archaeological sites, and historic buildings are all affected. For example, rising sea levels threaten cultural heritage sites like Venice, while heavy rainfall and temperature fluctuations erode the substance of the Hagar Qim temples in Malta. At the same time, mass tourism endangers sensitive ecosystems, such as the Galapagos Islands.

Reports on the state of conservation of World Heritage sites are discussed annually at the World Heritage Committee session. Additionally, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre coordinates numerous international projects to ensure the sustainable protection of these sites.

The Strategic Goals of the World Heritage Convention: the “Five Cs”

UNESCO World Heritage is guided by its five Cs, which represent the strategic objectives of the World Heritage Convention: credibility, conservation, capacity-building, communication, and communities.

In 2002, at the 26th session of the World Heritage Committee in Budapest, four Cs were officially adopted: credibility, conservation, capacity-building, and communication. These strategic goals were designed to promote the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. In 2007, community was added as the fifth C, following a proposal from New Zealand, at the Committee’s 31st session in Christchurch, New Zealand (June 23 – July 2, 2007).

After the World Heritage List developed an unbalanced character, corrective measures were needed. The first early attempt was the Global Strategy for a Representative, Balanced, and Credible World Heritage List, adopted in 1994 at the 18th session of the World Heritage Committee in Phuket. Subsequently, Regional Global Strategy Action Plans were developed and reviewed by the Committee, focusing mainly on capacity-building.

The Five Strategic Goals – The “Five Cs”

The five strategic goals respond to increasing demands for a sustainable, comprehensive, and inclusive implementation of the World Heritage Convention:

1. Strengthen the credibility of the World Heritage List;
2. Ensure the effective conservation of World Heritage sites;
3. Promote the development of effective capacity-building in States Parties;
4. Raise public awareness, engagement, and support for World Heritage through communication;
5. Enhance the role of communities in implementing the World Heritage Convention.

Credibility

The first C refers to the credibility of the World Heritage Convention, particularly the credibility of the World Heritage List. The Convention enjoys wide acceptance, with 193 States Parties, but ratification should not remain merely symbolic. The Convention is intended as an effective tool to protect the world’s outstanding cultural and natural heritage.

The World Heritage List represents the most visible expression of the Convention and must reflect the outstanding universal value of the sites. Therefore, the list must be balanced, both regionally and between cultural and natural categories, correcting the prevailing Eurocentric character to better represent sites from around the world.

This goal is pursued through identifying underrepresented cultural and natural categories, harmonizing national tentative lists, and promoting nominations of underrepresented categories.

Conservation

Effective conservation of World Heritage sites is essential to safeguard their Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). World Heritage is not just about listing new sites; it requires long-term legislative, regulatory, institutional, and/or traditional protection and management, including management systems or plans, adequately defined boundaries for effective protection, and integration of conservation with daily management and sustainable development.

Capacity-building

Developing effective capacity-building measures in States Parties is a top priority. The Committee has developed a global training strategy, reflecting the high level of expertise and multidisciplinary approach needed for protection, conservation, and presentation of World Heritage.

The strategy ensures that necessary skills are developed among various stakeholders for better implementation of the Convention. The Committee annually reviews training issues, assesses needs, and recommends future initiatives.

Communication

Communication is a key tool to promote and disseminate the values of World Heritage. It helps ensure that the significance and quality of sites are understood at international, national, regional, and local levels, including by owners, local communities, investors, and other stakeholders.

Communication facilitates information exchange, dissemination of best practices, coordination of activities, and dialogue between authorities and civil society regarding site management and development. Raising awareness among local populations and the public is an important aspect.

Communities

The fifth C, community, added in 2007, highlights the critical role of local communities in listing, managing, promoting, and developing World Heritage sites. Local communities as “custodians” of a site should be recognized as key actors in identification, management, and sustainable development.

Inclusion of local communities should be based on constructive dialogue, enabling informed decision-making among all stakeholders. Community engagement promotes mutual understanding and collaboration, supporting participatory management systems and effective, inclusive governance of World Heritage sites.

Source: https://www.scola-telcz.net/5-c-s