IUCN Evaluation of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WHC-08/32.COM/INF.8B2 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage IUCN Evaluation of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List Report to the World Heritage Committee 32nd Session 2-10 July 2008, Québec City, Canada Prepared by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) May 2008 Cover Photo: Socotra Archipelago, Yemen © IUCN / Khaldoun Al Omari IUCN Evaluation of Nominations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the World Heritage List 2008 Table of Contents Page No. Introduction i IUCN Technical Evaluation Reports A Natural Properties A1 New Nominations of Natural Properties Arab States Yemen – Socotra Archipelago 1 Asia / Pacifi c China – Mount Sanqingshan National Park 13 Mongolia – Hovsgol Lake and its Watershed 25 Europe / North America Canada – The Joggins Fossil Cliffs 33 France – The Lagoons of New Caledonia: Reef Diversity and Associated 43 Ecosystems Iceland – Surtsey 55 Italy – Bradyseism in Phlegraean Area 63 Russian Federation – “The Putorana Plateau” Nature Complex 69 Switzerland – Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona (former Glarus Overthrust) 79 Latin America / Caribbean Bolivia – Quarry of the Fabrica Nacional de Cementos S.A. (FANCESA), 87 Cal Orck’O, Sucre, Departamento Chuquisaca Mexico – Monarch Butterfl y Biosphere Reserve 93 A2 Deferred Nominations of Natural Properties Asia / Pacifi c Kazakhstan – Saryarka - Steppe and Lakes of Northern Kazakhstan 101 Page No. A Natural Properties A3 Extensions of Natural Properties Europe / North America Bulgaria – Pirin National Park (extension) 111 A4 Boundary Modifi cations of Natural Properties Europe / North America Bulgaria – Srebarna Nature Reserve (boundary modifi cation) 121 Hungary / Slovakia – Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst (boundary 123 modifi cation) B Mixed Properties B1 Boundary Modifi cations of Mixed Properties Europe / North America Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Natural and Cultural Heritage of the 127 Ohrid Region (boundary modifi cation) C Cultural Properties C1 New Nominations of Cultural Landscapes Africa Mauritius – Le Morne Cultural Landscape 131 Asia / Pacifi c Indonesia – Cultural Landscape of Bali Province 133 Papua New Guinea – The Kuk Early Agricultural Site 135 Vanuatu – Chief Roi Mata’s Domain 137 C2 Referred Nominations of Cultural Landscapes Africa Kenya – The Sacred Mijikenda Kaya Forests 139 Asia / Pacifi c India – River Island of Majuli in Midstream of Brahmaputra River in Assam 141 Numerical Index ID No. State Party Property Page No. Former Yugoslav Republic Natural and Cultural Heritage of the Ohrid Region 99 127 of Macedonia (boundary modifi cation) Srebarna Nature Reserve (boundary modifi cation) 219 Bulgaria 121 225 Bis Bulgaria Pirin National Park (extension) 111 Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst (boundary 725 Bis Hungary / Slovakia 123 modifi cation) 887 Papua New Guinea The Kuk Early Agricultural Site 135 1082 Mongolia Hovsgol Lake and its Watershed 25 Saryarka - Steppe and Lakes of Northern 1102 Rev Kazakhstan 101 Kazakhstan The Lagoons of New Caledonia: Reef Diversity and 1115 France 43 Associated Ecosystems Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona (former Glarus 1179 Switzerland 79 Overthrust) 1194 Indonesia Cultural Landscape of Bali Province 133 River Island of Majuli in Midstream of Brahmaputra 1206 Rev India 141 River in Assam 1231 Rev Kenya The Sacred Mijikenda Kaya Forests 139 1234 Russian Federation “The Putorana Plateau” Nature Complex 69 1259 Mauritius Le Morne Cultural Landscape 131 1263 Yemen Socotra Archipelago 1 1267 Iceland Surtsey 55 1280 Vanuatu Chief Roi Mata’s Domain 137 Quarry of the Fabrica Nacional de Cementos S.A. 1284 Bolivia (FANCESA), Cal Orck’O, Sucre, Departamento 87 Chuquisaca 1285 Canada The Joggins Fossil Cliffs 33 1288 Italy Bradyseism in Phlegraean Area 63 1290 Mexico Monarch Butterfl y Biosphere Reserve 93 1292 China Mount Sanqingshan National Park 13 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION IUCN TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT OF WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATIONS May 2008 1. INTRODUCTION These networks allow for the increasing involvement of regional natural heritage experts and broaden This technical evaluation report of natural and mixed the capacity of IUCN with regard to its work under properties nominated for inclusion on the World the World Heritage Convention. Reports from fi eld Heritage List has been conducted by the Programme missions and comments from a large number of on Protected Areas (PPA) of IUCN, the International external reviewers are comprehensively examined by Union for Conservation of Nature. PPA co-ordinates the IUCN World Heritage Panel. PPA then prepares the IUCN’s input to the World Heritage Convention. It fi nal technical evaluation reports which are presented also works closely with IUCN’s World Commission on in this document and represent the corporate position Protected Areas (WCPA), the world’s leading expert of IUCN on World Heritage evaluations. IUCN has network of protected area managers and specialists, also placed emphasis on providing input and support and other Commissions, members and partners of to ICOMOS in relation to those cultural landscapes IUCN. which have important natural values. In carrying out its function under the World In 2005, IUCN commissioned an external review of Heritage Convention IUCN has been guided by four its work on World Heritage evaluations, which was principles: carried out by Dr. Christina Cameron and resulted in a number of recommendations to improve IUCN’s work. (i) the need to ensure the highest standards of The review and the IUCN management response are quality control and institutional memory in available on IUCN’s website. A progress report on relation to technical evaluation, monitoring and the implementation of the review’s recommendations other associated activities; was examined by the IUCN World Heritage Panel in December 2007 and indicated that IUCN has fully or (ii) the need to increase the use of specialist partly addressed all 26 recommendations, with further networks of IUCN, especially WCPA, but also action ongoing on a number of recommendations. other relevant IUCN Commissions and specialist networks; 2. EVALUATION PROCESS (iii) the need to work in support of the UNESCO World In carrying out the technical evaluation of nominations Heritage Centre and States Parties to examine IUCN is guided by the Operational Guidelines of the how IUCN can creatively and effectively support Convention. The evaluation process is carried out over the World Heritage Convention and individual the period of one year, from the receipt of nominations properties as “fl agships” for conservation; and at IUCN in April and the submission of the IUCN evaluation report to the World Heritage Centre in May (iv) the need to increase the level of effective of the following year. The process (outlined in Figure partnership between IUCN and the World 1) involves the following steps: Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM. 1. Data Assembly. A standardised data sheet is Members of the expert network of WCPA carry out the compiled on the nominated property by UNEP’s majority of technical evaluation missions. The WCPA World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP- network now totals 1200 protected area managers and WCMC), using the nomination document, the specialists from 140 countries. In addition, PPA has World Database on Protected Areas and other called on experts from IUCN’s other fi ve Commissions available reference material. (Species Survival, Environmental Law, Education and Communication, Ecosystem Management, and 2. External Review. The nomination is sent to Environmental, Economic and Social Policy), from independent experts knowledgeable about the international earth science unions, other IUCN Global property or its natural values, including members Programmes, and scientifi c contacts in universities of WCPA, other IUCN specialist commissions and and other international agencies. This highlights the scientifi c networks or NGOs working in the region considerable “added value” from investing in the (approximately 130 external reviewers provided use of the extensive networks of IUCN and partner input in relation to the properties examined in 2007 institutions. / 2008). IUCN Evaluation Report May 2008 i 3. Field Mission. Missions involving one or more • After the IUCN World Heritage Panel – If the IUCN and external experts evaluate the nominated Panel fi nds some questions are still unanswered property on the ground and discuss the nomination or further issues need to be clarifi ed, a fi nal with the relevant national and local authorities, letter will be sent to the State Party requesting local communities, NGOs and other stakeholders. supplementary information by a specifi c deadline. Missions usually take place between May and That deadline must be adhered to strictly in order November. In the case of mixed properties and to allow IUCN to complete its evaluation. certain cultural landscapes, missions are jointly implemented with ICOMOS. Note: If the information provided by the State Party at the time of nomination and during the mission is 4. IUCN World Heritage Panel Review. The IUCN adequate, IUCN does not request supplementary World Heritage Panel meets at least once per information. It is expected that supplementary year, usually in December at IUCN Headquarters information will be in response to specifi c questions in Switzerland to examine each nomination. A or issues and should not include completely second meeting or conference call is arranged revised nominations or substantial amounts