I am now skeptical about the 44th session of the World Heritage Committee taking place in june or even later this year.
Covid 2019...
We might have zero inscription for 2020

Well than, with that post you have just crashed my last hopes for having a few ticks this year.

If you would have told me that a few weeks back, I would have gone absolutely mad. These days however I can only hope for everyone to stay safe and sound. #ohhowIhatebat(or bad)soup....

This summer's session to be held in China (!) could, for example, be moved to December. Before the sessions took place at the end of the year.

I am not familiar with details of WHC Sessions but for non-expert it seems it could be easily done by Internet, be it in June or December.

Announcement from UNESCO website

In light of recent developments in the world related to coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), any possible impacts this situation will have on the 44th session of the World Heritage Committee (scheduled for 29 June - 9 July 2020) are currently carefully considered.

The health and well-being of all participants is of primary concern and we continue to follow the recommendations of national and international public health authorities regarding the COVID-19 situation.

Further information will be provided as soon as possible. Many thanks for your understanding.

https://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/44com/

For me these sessions are always exciting and bothering at the same time. I usually get around 4-6 new one's but then also around 20 more the I have't visited. I also pressure myself every year to visit at least more sites than are added. Plus, a year with no new sites would probably help a bit to catch up with the overall percentage.

If I can have a yoga class online, the WHC can meet online, too. Would make sense anyhow, if they are serious about battling climate change. Added benefit, discussions could be shorter and home advantage would disappear.


A year without travel won't help you catch up at all... The WHC was probably my last change to add any sites for first part of the year (excl. January trip). The frustrating part to me nowadays is the mediocre inscriptions (Prosecco?) being given a pass quite regularly, so much so that the overall reputation of the list for me is deteroirating.

A couple of points about WHCs
a. The inscription of new sites is, in reality, one of the less important functions of the WHC - even though it may be the most visible output. Having it delayed for a year is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things. Other (probably more important?) aspects of the WHC - networking and exchange of ideas/knowledge etc on heritage and conservation matters would be lost
b. The public plenary sessions are also only the tip of the iceberg. Even for new inscriptions the result reflects all sorts of background/ corridor discussions and deals which couldn't really be replicated by a video conference. It might be said that such discussions/deals shouldn't be happening - I suppose they could agree simply to inscribe all those sites where the AB said inscribe and defer all the others until next year. But I wonder if the ABs will be "ready" with their recommendations anyway. All site visits should have been completed pre-Covid but no doubt the ABs will claim that "social distancing" will prevent their experts getting together to finalise conclusions. If these things were matters of life and death they could no doubt be done "at distance" using technology - but they are not.

It could be said of course that losing its WHC is just another cost China will have to pay for landing the world with this virus!!

Sorry, but this is uncalled for.

It is totally called for.
The People's Republic of China maintains a repressive regime in which rational debate on matters concerning government actions is not possible. As was shown by the arrest and "shut down" of the Wuhan doctor who tried to "tell" the truth, Li Wenliang, the Chinese political system prevented proper action being taken to control Covid 19 before the genie was out of the bottle and spread around the World had commenced

It also appears that the virus was transferred from animal hosts (bats?) to humans by cultural factors such as habits regarding the use and keeping of wild animals. Thus there was transmission via Pangolins kept in animal markets in Wuhan. This is a cultural practice which should have been wiped out. The potential dangers of wild animal to human virus transmission are well known. SARS is thought to have emerged from an animal reservoir (as of course have the deadly recent W African viruses). China should have done more to alter this "cultural practice"

When I first visited China in 1978 I remember every hotel having a row of spittoons in its corridor because of the almost universal cultural habit of spitting. Deng Xiao Peng was famous for being able to "hit" a spittoon from 5 metres! Most people would agree that public spitting is an unhealthy practice and should be stamped out. That has largely happened now in China. However, despite being able to control almost every aspect of life among e.g the Uighurs, the Chinese Government has failed to prevent such uses of wild animals (and similarly the use of the parts of other endangered species.) and we are all now suffering because of that.

These aspects need to be accepted and acted upon by the PRC once all this is over.

Keep such comments for Twitter, if you feel like it.
As you yourself point out, such viruses have also emerged in Africa (ebola) and indeed in the Middle East (MERS, transmitted from camels). Other governments too have been slow to react to the outbreak in their countries. Inflammatory accusations don't help - on the contrary, they foster a climate of discrimination against Asian-looking people.

@Khuft - I agree. China is to blame in the same way as Guinea for parents of 2-year-old boy who, probably unsupervised, had contact with wild animals and catched Ebola. I assume letting little babies play unsupervised is also "a cultural practice which should have been wiped out".

Besides, some people claim that the reaction of "repressive regime of China" was way more humanitarian than the initial approach of democratic UK government.

But I agree this forum is not the best place for such discussion.

Locking this topic to cool off for a day....

"Information

In light of recent developments in the world related to pandemic COVID-19, it was decided that the 44th session of the World Heritage Committee, initially scheduled for 29 June - 9 July 2020 will be postponed to a later date. Consultations are currently under way to determine the exact dates of the session.

Further information will be provided as soon as possible. Many thanks for your understanding."

http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/44com/

Well, that was to be expected.