Chichen Itza
Gebel Berkal

World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers

Cultural landscape not recognized

WHS which were identified as a potential Cultural Landscape in the Nomination and/or the AB evaluation but have not been recognised as such in the "official" UNESCO List of Cultural Landscapes.

The connection belongs to World Heritage Process connections.

Connected Sites

  • Aflaj irrigation system: ICOMOS: "The wider nomination should be considered as a collection of cultural landscapes representing distinctive, long-standing, sustainable and living ways of managing water resources"
  • Al Ain: Nominated as such, no clear stand from ICOMOS (because negative about the OUV of it all)
  • Ancient Nara: 1997 AB eval states "the Nara Palace Site, the Kasuga-Taisha Compound, and the Kasugayama Primeval Forest are sites, whilst the latter two are also associative cultural landscapes"
  • Ani: Ani was originally nominated as a cultural landscape, but in a revision dated February 2016, Ani was put forward as an archaeological site by Turkey (ICOMOS regarded "that the comparative analysis is insufficient to demonstrate that the property is an outstanding example of a cultural landscape" AB ev)
  • Beemster Polder: Brought forward as cultural landscape in AB ev
  • Butrint: Clearly described as a CL in 1997 extension. Relict.
  • Derwent Valley Mills: Clearly described as a CL in 2001 AB evaluation. Is industrial landscape, relict.
  • Falun Great Copper Mountain: Title calls it a "CL" (full nomination name = The historic cultural landscape of the Great Copper Mountain in Falun) and ICOMOS recognises this in evaluation (It is also a cultural landscape)
  • Ferrara: 1999 extension in AB ev described as cultural landscape - crit v of the inscription even says "The Po Delta is an outstanding planned cultural landscape"
  • Fujisan: Described in AB as "to be managed as a CL". If so would be "Assoc"?
  • Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain: Specifically descr as a CL in AB eval! No type given - "Assoc" and "Continuing"?
  • Khangchendzonga National Park: AB eval states "ICOMOS recommends that Khangchedzonga National Park, India, be inscribed on the World Heritage List as a cultural landscape on the basis of cultural criteria (iii) and (vi)."
  • Laponian Area: Proposed as a cultural landscape and recognized as such according to OUV crit v : a cultural landscape reflecting the ancestral way of life of the Saami people
  • Las Medulas: Clearly described as a CL in 1997 extension
  • Lenggong Valley: Proposed as a relict cultural landscape
  • Palmeral of Elche: The Palm Grove may also be considered to conform with the continuing organic cultural landscape (AB ev)
  • Pergamon: Is titled a CL and it was clearly accepted as a CL by ICOMOS -not clear why it isnt on the UNESCO CL List
  • Rock Islands: Clearly nominated as a CL and recognised as such by ICOMOS
  • Røros: Clearly descr as a CL in 2010 extension
  • Schokland: Not officially a CL? - the words are used
  • Sewell Mining Town: AB ev: could also be a cultural landscape
  • Stari Grad Plain: Clearly accepted as a CL by ICOMOS - not clear why not on UNESCO CL List
  • Tsodilo: Proposed as a cultural landscape, and supported as such by ICOMOS: "Tsodilo should be considered as a cultural landscape because it is well qualified in this category of cultural site. It qualifies primarily under category iii, "an associative cultural landscape"
  • Upper Svaneti: It should also be considered to be a cultural landscape (AB ev)
  • Villa d'Este: "It is also a cultural landscape" (AB) and Fowler "Villa d'Este, Tivoli, Italy, inscribed but not recognized as the category 1 cultural landscape which it clearly is;" Page 23
  • Wadi Rum: AB "cannot be said to substantiate the property as a CL that demonstrates an exceptional reflection of Cultural traditions over time". Was this why it wasn't inscribed as CL by UNESCO??


Do you know of another WHS we could connect to Cultural landscape not recognized?

Send it to me!

A connection should:

  1. Not be "self evident"
  2. Link at least 3 different sites
  3. Not duplicate or merely subdivide the "Category" assignment already identified on this site.
  4. Add some knowledge or insight (whether significant or trivial!) about WHS for the users of this site
  5. Be explained, with reference to a source