World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions /  
 

2015 WHC

 
 
Page  Page 15 of 17:  « Previous  1  ...  14  15  16  17  Next »

Author meltwaterfalls
Partaker
#211 | Posted: 18 May 2015 10:21 
winterkjm:
2 important proposals
- Limit of Nominations to 25 Total
- Limiting State parties to 1 new nomination

Sounds like a good idea to me, even if it will cut down the new WHS within striking distance.
I wonder what mechanism they will come up with for allotting which countries can put something forward. I assume the under represented nations get pushed to the front of the queue. Or those 25 slots will just be filled by the usual suspects and their slew of vineyards/ minor ecclesiastical ruins.

Author Assif
Partaker
#212 | Posted: 18 May 2015 17:29 
Already back in Cairns such criteria were formulated for the case (that never occurred) in which more than 45 sites were submitted:

In the event that the number of nominations received exceeds the maximum number set by the Committee, the following priority system will be applied each year by the World Heritage Centre before nominations are transmitted to the advisory bodies for evaluation, in determining which sites should be taken forward for consideration:
1) Nominations of sites submitted by a State Party with no sites inscribed on the List;
2) Nominations of sites from any State Party that illustrate un-represented or less represented categories of natural and cultural properties, as determined by analyses prepared by the Secretariat and the Advisory Bodies and reviewed and approved by the Committee;
3) Other nominations.
When applying this priority system, date of receipt of full and complete nominations by the World Heritage Centre shall be used as the secondary determining factor within the category where the number of nominations established by the Committee is reached.
In addition to the approved maximum number of sites, the Committee will also consider nominations deferred, or referred, from previous meetings and changes to the boundaries of already inscribed properties. The Committee may also decide to consider, on an emergency basis, situations falling under paragraph 67 of the Operational Guidelines.

Author Khuft
Partaker
#213 | Posted: 18 May 2015 19:00 
meltwaterfalls:
Or those 25 slots will just be filled by the usual suspects and their slew of vineyards/ minor ecclesiastical ruins.


That would be my fear. The "usual suspects" already file most nominations. Even with the upstream process, countries like Kenya did not manage to get a favourable ICOMOS voting this year. If you restrict the nominations to 25, you might just end up skewing the list even more in the favour of the "usual suspects".

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#214 | Posted: 18 May 2015 23:47 | Edited by: Solivagant 
What I find "weak" is the excuse of lack of money. They could easily make every country with a GDP per head say greater than the World's average pay for the evaluation process of its sites - or even twice the amount to pay for the others!!!
The reason given doesn't really add up and smacks of special pleading - "we dont get given enough money"

Author pikkle
Partaker
#215 | Posted: 19 May 2015 17:52 | Edited by: pikkle 
Too bad the U.S. can't work out the problems with the stupid Palestine law. Then UNESCO would be receiving more money again. Just write it out with a clause that the U.S. will not fund any Palestinian nominations, abstain from voting, or recognize it as a UNESCO country.

Pipedream.

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#216 | Posted: 19 May 2015 19:25 
pikkle:
Too bad the U.S. can't work out the problems with the stupid Palestine law.

It is unfortunate and somewhat nonsensical, but then again it also does not make sense that the budget of UNESCO cannot function without a single state party, no?

Author Khuft
Partaker
#217 | Posted: 21 May 2015 17:57 
Whatever the political discussions (e.g. Korea vs the Japanese Meiji sites) that will certainly entertain us this year, it is nevertheless undoubtedly the saddest year I can remember for world heritage. With the looming destruction of Palmyra, the previous devastations in Syria and Iraq, the chaos in Yemen and the earthquake in Nepal, 2015 to me is a watershed for the whole idea of heritage. In the recent years, the UNESCO WH convention has been derided for being little more than a touristy promotion tool, as well as for being an unwieldy bureaucracy seeking to perpetrate itself. But unfortunately all this is irrelevant as the basic tenant of the convention is being challenged not only by the abhorrent IS, but also by the combattants in Yemen, by the milicias in Libya, by various rebel groups in the Sahel, etc.

Now one might argue that the the convention cannot prevent the atrocities of such madmen. But of course it's not just the historical sites that suffer - hundreds an thousands are murdered or have to flee from these areas too, while the UN (the umbrella organisation to which UNESCO and others belong) and its member states are doing nothing.

For me, the upcoming WHC is a depressing event. But, ok, I promise, I will stop rambling now.

Author pikkle
Partaker
#218 | Posted: 21 May 2015 19:44 
Don't stop rambling. You are making perfect sense. I am distraught by the news that comes in seemingly every day from Iraq with the loss of Nineveh and Hatra, sites that represent the formation of humanity, and now one of the most important and glorious sites in the Middle East - Palmyra. And now Sana'a - there is nowhere else like these places once they are gone.

I have confidence in Nepal, but I can not help but become extremely emotional about all the loss of human life and human heritage this year.

It is indeed a depressing event, because despite being a UN organization, there's nothing that UNESCO can do except issue statements. They can add more sites, and I'll be interested in that, but have we not lost or in the process of losing/suffering destruction to a whole convention worth of sites, as it is? Aleppo, Krak de Chevaliers, Hatra, Palmyra, Kathmandu, Bosra, Damascus, Sana'a.... And those are only the UNESCO sites that have suffered damage. Countless other important sites have been damaged or destroyed.

If only UN peacekeeping missions could set up perimeters around places such as Palmyra, rather than simply issue statements. Or perhaps we need another Queen Zenobia...

Author elsslots
Admin
#219 | Posted: 22 May 2015 00:28 
India has withdrawn its nomination for Delhi this year (before the ICOMOS ev was published)

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#220 | Posted: 22 May 2015 18:54 
Looks like India may have a chance for Hyderabad for 2015, if the report is to be believed. Has the site already been evaluated previously?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Hyderabad-a-step-closer-to-world-he ritage-tag/articleshow/47391293.cms

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#221 | Posted: 23 May 2015 12:37 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Looks like Korea is willing to concede somewhat if Japan includes a descrption\sign board related to the 7 sites where forced labor occured. Certainly not unreasonable, in my opinion. Any thoughts?

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201505230050

Author Assif
Partaker
#222 | Posted: 24 May 2015 06:43 
winterkjm:
Looks like India may have a chance for Hyderabad for 2015, if the report is to be believed. Has the site already been evaluated previously?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Hyderabad-a-step-closer-to-world-he ritage-tag/articleshow/47391293.cms


Hyderabad was submitted, but since it was (indefinitely) postponed, no Icomos evaluation has been carried out. It would be odd if India could make it fit in. Still, we got Maymand for which no evaluation has been published yet.

winterkjm:
Looks like Korea is willing to concede somewhat if Japan includes a descrption\sign board related to the 7 sites where forced labor occured. Certainly not unreasonable, in my opinion. Any thoughts?


I consider it the absolute minimum considering Japan's constant refusal to recognise its responsibility for WWII atrocities in Korea and China.

Author kkanekahn
Partaker
#223 | Posted: 26 May 2015 01:28 

Author Khuft
Partaker
#224 | Posted: 27 May 2015 09:50 | Edited by: Khuft 
Khuft:
the looming destruction of Palmyra


The Islamic State has now apparently promised "only" to destroy the statues in Palmyra, and not to bulldoze the whole site... I guess that counts as positive news nowadays.

Spiegel article, in German

Author Khuft
Partaker
#225 | Posted: 28 May 2015 08:43 
kkanekahn:
Reason for withdrawal of Delhi http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/why-government-doesnt-want-delhi-to-be-a-world-heritag e-city-anymore-765310


A corrigendum was just posted on WHC:

"Corrigendum
On page 1 of Document WHC-15/39.COM/8B, the paragraph on “Nominations
withdrawn at the request of the State Party”, should read as follows:
Nomination postponed on basis of information provided by the State Party
The nomination of Delhi’s Imperial Capital Cities, India, has been postponed for
consideration of the World Heritage Committee to a later date."

URL

Page  Page 15 of 17:  « Previous  1  ...  14  15  16  17  Next » 
WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions /
 2015 WHC

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message


 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.

 
 
 
www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®
 ⇑