World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



Forum: Start | Profile | Search |         Website: Start | The List | Community |
What are they doing all day in Paris anyway? www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / What are they doing all day in Paris anyway? /  
 

Pending Sites

 
Author Assif
Partaker
#1 | Posted: 20 Sep 2013 14:10 
I gathered it would be interesting to go through the list of pending sites http://www.worldheritagesite.org/pending.html and try to recognise which of these sites are going to have a second go (or a third or a fourth). Some of them have been already departed from and are certainly not going to refigure in future proposals.

Le Corbusier (Argentina, Belgium, Germany, France, Switzerland, India and Japan) - planned for 2016
Bregenzer Wald, Hohe Tauern (Austria) - both are not going to be pursued
Hycanian Forest (Iran, Azerbaijan) - will be pursued ?
Hawar (Bahrain) - will be pursued ?
Augustow Canal (Poland, Belarussia)- will be pursued ?

Potalsk (Belarussia) - not going to be pursued
Ouidah (Benin) - will be pursued
Pendjari (Benin) - planned for 2016
Cal Orck'o (Bolivia) - not going to be pursued
Incallajta (Bolivia) - will be pursued ?
Sarajevo, Jajce (Bosnia Herzegovina) - will be pursued ?

Okavango (Botswana) - for nomination in 2014
Parati (Brazil) - will be pursued
Plovdiv (Bulgaria) - will be pursued ?
Pimachiowin Aki (Canada) - will be pursued ?
Juan Fernandez NP (Chile) - will not be pursued ?

Wudalianchi (China) - will be pursued
Chiribiquete (Colombia) - will not be pursued ?
Corcovado (Costa Rica) - will not be pursued ?

Lonjsko Polje (Croatia) - not going to be pursued
Zadar (Croatia) - will be pursued ?
Cienaga de Zapata (Cuba) - will not be pursued ?
Troodos ext. (Cyprus) - will not be pursued ?
Cesky Raj (Czech R.) - will be pursued ?

Trebon, Velke Losiny, Slavonice, Luhakovice - not going to be pursued
Sites of Great Moravia (Czech R., Solvakia) - will be pursued
Stevns Klint (Denmark) - will be pursued
Parque del Este, Ruta de los Ingenios (Dom. R.) - will not be pursued ?
Paredones (Ecuador) - will not be pursued ?


To be continued.

Author elsslots
Admin
#2 | Posted: 21 Sep 2013 01:32 
To be honest, I think 80-90% of the Pending List will not be pursued (or at least not successfully).

After a referral/deferral you'll have to follow up immediately the next year. There's still momentum then, both with the nominating country (project structure still in place, data up-to-date) and the WHC. If you leave it to later, other possible WHS have come up and you have to write a complete new nomination (as is the case with rejected nominations, have to look for a different angle).

Author vantcj1
Partaker
#3 | Posted: 21 Sep 2013 14:20 | Edited by: vantcj1 
In the case of Corcovado, I didn't find anything from the Ministry of the Environment, thus, it's probable that nothing is currently being done about that. They just assumed that they couldn't do anything that could get such a site inscribed. I disagree, since Corcovado is worldwide famous for the density of its biodiversity, and a candidacy of the whole contiguous areas of the Osa Conservation Area (that includes Corcovado) is as feasible as Guanacaste Conservation Area was at its time. And covers a similar area, which was something that IUCN strongly criticized in 2003. And could have some degree of biological connection to the Brunqueρa Sierra, the closest mountain range, and through it, to Talamanca, which was another of the problems that justified its rejection. More information on Osa Conservation Area here URL

But there is always a but... URL and it is that in the last years there has been a mounting concern about the fact that illegal gold mining, hunting (which is now forbidden in Costa Rica) and poaching is taking place in Corcovado. It has happened for decades, but now the gold miners are using equipment such as pumps, and creating channels to redirect the water from the rivers. There is a real damage to the protected area and the means of preventing it are scarce. Even now the police has had to be deployed in the park, because the rangers alone can't fight the armed poachers. It has to be reminded that it is one of the poorest areas in the country and somehow people is looking for a better source of income. I have read somewhere that there is an ongoing intervention in the neighbouring areas to educate locals about the importance of preserving the protected areas, and recently there was a campaign by the Corcovado Foundation on the media for collecting resources to tackle the problems in such a vast and isolated area...but I can't help but have the feeling that there is a tangible deterioration in most of the protected areas of my country.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#4 | Posted: 5 Mar 2014 02:36 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Have found a few more of these. Our "record" of referred/deferred sites on the T List is incomplete.
See this document for the 2001 Bureau in Paris in June 2001
http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2001/whc-01-conf205-inf4e.pdf

Ephesus.
Yes - I wasn't aware but this No 3 on the "Top Missing 50 List" was nominated by Turkey in 2001! "There is therefore a prima facie case for the eventual inscription of Ephesus on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria ii, iii, and possibly vi." BUT "That further consideration of this nomination be deferred to enable the State Party to prepare and implement a comprehensive management plan; this should be accompanied by a map which clearly indicates the areas nominated for inscription and the buffer zone."
This doesn't seem a particularly onerous requirement for Turkey to carry out. For some reason I don't understand there is no record of Ephesus having been discussed at the full WHC in Dec 2001 in Helsinki (Turkey might have withdrawn it of course but with only a deferral recommended there was no great need to do so) and I can find no evidence that the site has ever been put forward again. (but I may have missed both of these)
In June 2010 there was "news" that Turkey intended (or at least was "taking steps" towards!) nominating the site but there was no reference that I can find so far to the earlier nomination and its "deferral" recommendation (I use that terminology because it doesn't appear to have ever been "officially deferred" even though that was the ICOMOS recommendation)
http://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/turkey-to-nominate-archaeologica l-site.html#.Uxbzu_miRpw
Then in Nov 2012 there was this news that Ephesus was "getting a facelift" in readiness for World Heritage Nomination - I am sure that the area for "Camel Wrestling" will be a great plus point for UNESCO!!!
http://www.archaiologia.gr/en/blog/2012/11/13/ephesus-gets-facelift/

Vardzia-Khertvisi Historical Area (Georgia)
"Subject to a favourable expert mission report, ICOMOS recommends that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria ii, iii, iv, and v:" Again I can find no evidence of it ever being discussed

Tbilisi Historic District
The paper (prepared Sept 2001) for the December Helsinki meeting states
"ICOMOS Recommendation
That the site be deferred subject to establishment of an appropriate legal framework, the management structures and guidelines for the rehabilitation, restoration and control of change in the proposed nomination area.
Bureau Recommendation
The Bureau decided that the nomination of the Tbilisi Historic District be referred back, to allow ICOMOS time to study the recently received additional information, including a comparative study for the historic district. Should this study meet the requirements of the Operational Guidelines, in the view of ICOMOS, the Advisory Body will then formulate its recommendation for the extraordinary Bureau in December 2001."

I can find no minute of any discussion about the site at the "extraordinary Bureau" which took place in Helsinki immeditely prior to the WHC

Author kkanekahn
Partaker
#5 | Posted: 6 Mar 2014 01:01 
These are some common sites which were submitted incomplete form. So, they have a chance this year just going through trend..

Kenya Thimlich Ohinga Cultural Landscape
Jordan Baptism Site "Bethany Beyond the Jordan" (Al-Maghtas)
Sudan Sanganeb and Dungonab Bay – Mukkawar Island Marine National Parks
Indonesia Toraja Traditional Settlements
Mongolia Great Burkhan Khaldun Mountain and its Surrounding Sacred Landscape
Russia/ Mongolia Landscapes of Dauria
Uzbekistan Ancient Termez
Georgia Gelati Monastery (Extension of "Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery" )
Ukraine Historic environment of the Crimean Khans' capital in the city of Bağηasaray
Brazil Paraty, culture and nature
Uzbekistan Petroglyphs within Archaeological and Natural Landscape of Sarmishsay

Author Assif
Partaker
#6 | Posted: 30 May 2014 13:09 | Edited by: Assif 
Here is the current list of pending sites. For each I added yes (future nomination planned), no (end of the road), ? (no idea). It would be nice to have further input to those ? sites.

Herat (Afghanistan) ?
Durres (Albania) no
Le Corbusier (Argentina and friends) yes
Noravank (Armenia) no
Bregenz Forest (Austria) no
Hohe Tauern (Austria) no
Hyrkan Forest (Azerbaijan, Iran) ?
Hawar (Bahrain) ?
Augostow Canal (Belarus, Poland) no
Polatsk (Belarus) no
Ouidah (Benin) ?
Pendjari (Benin) yes
Cal Orck'o (Bolivia) no
Incallajta (Bolivia) ?
Sarajevo (Bosnia) no
Jajce (Bosnia) no
Okavango (Botswana) yes
Parati (Brazil) yes
Neolithic dwellings (Bulgaria) no
Bourzanga (Burkina Faso) no
Sambor Prei Kuk (Cambodia) yes
Koh Ker (Cambodia) ?
Pimachiowin Aki (Canada) yes
Ennedi (Chad) yes
Fernandez (Chile) ?
China Altay (China) yes
Dongzhai (China) no
Poyang (China) no
Shennongjia (China) no
Alligator Sinensis (China) no
Guilin (China) yes
Wudalianchi (China) no
Chiribiquete (Colombia) ?
Upemba (DR Congo) no
Corcovado (Costa Rica) ?
Lonjsko Polje (Croatia) no
Zadar (Croatia) ?
Cienga de Zapata (Cuba) yes
Troodos extension (Cyprus) no
Cesky Raj (Czech R.) no
Trebon (Czech R.) no
Erzgebirge (Czech R., Germany) yes
Velke Losiny (Czech R.) no
Slavonice (Czech R.) no
Great Moravia (Czech R., Slovakia) yes
Karlstein (Czech R.) ?
Luhacovice (Czech R.) no
Stevns Klint (Denmark) yes
Parque del Este (Dom. Rep.) ?
Ruta de los Ingenios (Dom. Rep.) ?
Zaruma (Ecuador) yes
Paredones (Ecuador) no
Dahab (Egypt) no
Jebel Qatrani (Egypt) ?
Ras Mohammed (Egypt) ?
La Bermuda (El Salvador) ?
Baltic Klint (Estonia) no
Kuressaare (Estonia) ?
Bale (Ethiopia) no
Paimio (Finland) ?
Caves of Southern France (France) no
Chauvet-Pont d'Arch (France) yes
Mediterranean Pyrenees (France, Spain) no
Rouen (France) no
Nuits et Beaune (France) yes
Kokino (Macedonia) no
Minkebe (Gabon) ?
Tbilisi (Georgia) ?
Vardzia (Georgia) ?
Heidelberg (Germany) no
Schwetzingen (Germany) no
Tenzug (Ghana) yes
Nikopolis (Greece) no
Samaria (Greece) ?
Lesvos (Greece) ?
Sierra de las Minas (Guatemala) ?
Bigajos (Guinea Bissau) ?
Komarno (Hungary, Slovakia) no
Ipolytartnoc (Hungary) no
Great Himalayan (India) yes
Majuli (India) yes
Santiniketan (India) ?
Sri Harimandir (India) no
Hyderabad (India) yes
Mumbay (India) yes
Wild Ass (India) no
Besakih (Indonesia) no
Demak (Indonesia) no
Tana Toraja (Indonesia) yes
Harra (Iran) no
Susa (Iran) yes
Maymand (Iran) yes
Babylon (Iraq) ?
Makhteshim (Israel) no
Bet Guvrin (Israel) yes
Journies of Jesus (Israel) no
Hula (Israel) no
Dan (Israel) no
Bonifacio (Italy) no
Flegrea (Italy) no
Cascata delle Marmore (Italy) no
Monferrato (Italy) yes
Crow Mts (Jamaica) yes
Port Royal (Jamaica) yes
Jerash (Jordan) no
Salt (Jordan) ?
Pella (Jordan) no
Bethany (Jordan) yes
Tien-Shan (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan) yes
Thimlich Ohniga (Kenya) yes
Trakai (Lithuania) no
Isandra (Madagascar) ?
Boucle du Baoul (Mali) no
Knights fortifications (Malta) ?
Northern Marshalls (Marshalls) yes
Azougui (Mauritania) ?
Sinaloa (Mexico) yes
Banco Chincorro (Mexico) no
Yapese Disk Money (Micronesia, Palau) yes
Orheiul Vechi (Moldova) no
Mongolian sacred Mts (Mongolia) yes
Daurian Steppe (Mongolia, Russia) yes
Bagan (Myanmar) yes
Oke Idanre (Nigeria) yes
Oyo (Nigeria) no
Surame (Nigeria) yes
Rostaq (Oman) no
Harappa (Pakistan) yes
Hiran Minar (Pakistan) yes
Rani Kot (Pakistan) no
Mbarakayu (Paraguay) ?
Batanes (Philippines) yes
Jesuits (Philippines) ?
Hamiguitan (Philippines) yes
Bialowieza extension (Poland) yes
Gdansk (Poland) no
Arrabida (Portugal) no
Ilhas Selvagens (Portugal) no
Marvao (Portugal) no
Soraksan (South Korea) no
Dinosaurs (South Korea) no
Densus (Romania) no
Sibiu (Romania) no
Bashkir Ural (Russia) no
Kremlins (Russia) no
Bolgar (Russia) yes
Sviyazhsk (Russia) no
Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) ?
Iles de la Madeleine (Senegal) no
Mt. Sara (Serbia) yes
Devil's Town (Serbia) yes
Tatras (Slovakia) no
Pasture sites (Slovakia) no
Kosice (Slovakia) no
Ichnite sites (Spain) no
Girona (Spain) no
Trujillo (Spain) no
Primitive Route (Spain) yes
Silver Route (Spain) ?
Seruwila (Sri Lanka) yes
Dongola (Sudan) yes
Sanganeb (Sudan) yes
Suakin (Sudan) ?
Eastern Arc Mts (Tanzania) no
Ivory Route (Tanzania) yes
Bouhedma (Tunisia) no
Alanya (Turkey) no
Ephesus (Turkey) yes
Mardin (Turkey) yes
Sumela (Turkey) no
Darwin (UK) no
Lake District (UK) yes
St. Helena (UK) yes
Wearmouth (UK) no
Kiev extension (Ukraine) ?
Askaniya Nowa (Ukraine) no
Bakhchysarai (Ukraine) ?
Palacio Legislativo (Uruguay) no
Frank Lloyd (USA) yes
Mt. Vernon (USA) no
Termiz (Uzbekistan) yes
Mir-Sayid (Uzbekistan) yes
Rabati Malik (Uzbekistan) yes
Sarmishsay (Uzbekistan) yes
Ba Be Lake (Vietnam) ?
Ca Tien (Vietnam) no
Barotse (Zambia) yes
Ziwa (Zimbabwe) ?

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#7 | Posted: 30 May 2014 13:46 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Assif:
no (end of the road),

Out of interest - how is it "known" that all these "pending" sites have met the "end of the road". If they are still on a T List (as many are?) how can we be sure - unless there is some report specifically stating that the country doesn't intend progressing the site? Is there in these cases?

Regarding "?" sites.
I have had a very quick look through and one which caught my eye is "Blue and John Crow Mountains" from Jamaica. I have a particular interest in this site having visited it and it had a VERY long discussion at the 2011 WHC of which I give a flavour in this summary of a part
"NIG: asks for inscription of cultural property according to criterion vi
BRZ this case really needs a deferral to give the SP all options. BRZ would not be comfortable with the inscription at this point
SA in the report there are some strong views on criterion iii and therefore it should be inscribed under criterion iii and vi.
SWE supports Brazil
SUI supports defer option (BRZ, SWE) to allow the SP to work on culture and nature together
ICOMOS criterion iii was not proposed by the SP it has not been discussed by the SP.
CP are there any objections to inscription?
SWE, SUI, EST, (and others?) object.
CP asks Nigeria if it is ready to go with deferral?
NIG there is no majority for deferral.
BAH wishes to address ICOMOS again to clarify the question of OUV regarding the nominated property.
ICOMOS has not identified – for the time being – the OUV of the property. But there is potential to present OUV." etc etc


I believed from this that Jamaica was given the amber light to progress with some future hope!! And therefore for me too!!

I have done a bit of Googling and have found these recent documents
a. Feb 14 2014 - http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20140216/ent/ent73.html
Seems to suggest that a (revised) dossier was presented by end Jan 2014, presumably for consideration at the 2015 WHC
b. 25 Apr 2014 - http://www.prweb.com/releases/josephissa/worldheritage2014/prweb11775194.htm
Note the emphasis on the fact that Jamaica is now on the WHC!!!

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#8 | Posted: 30 May 2014 15:30 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Sites of Fossilized Dinosaurs throughout the Southern Seacoast NO, but perhaps not CLOSED

From CHA - "We are currently not in an official position to pursue another nomination yet."

Guilin (China)

The Guilin Karst system will be inscribed this year under phase II of the South China Karst extension.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#9 | Posted: 30 May 2014 15:51 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Regarding the "?" for Oke Idanre (Nigeria)
This report from Dec 2010 indicates that the Ondo State Government seems to be telling its people that the site HAS been inscribed!!!
"Before now the tourism industry in the State got a global boost as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) announced plans to enlist Oke Idanre Hills in Idanre local government area of the state into the World Heritage list."
And
"We want to showcase the rich natural endowment to the whole World since the town has been designated as a World Heritage Centre by UNESCO"
See - http://www.vanguardngr.com/2010/12/7-000-mountain-climbers-converge-on-idanre-hills-t oday/

In fact the site was not evaluated since its dossier was reported as being "Incomplete" in the the 2009 WHC Papers ("Nigeria Oke-Idanre Cultural Landscape, Id - 1332, Date Submitted - 27/01/2009, Criteria - (iii)(v)(vi) + CL,.... Incomplete.") The comments seem to refer to its status as being on the T List, and,as we know this is regarded in many countries as being "equivalent" to being inscribed!!!

The latest information I can find is dated Oct 31 2013 which states "I should tell you too that Idanre Cultural Landscape (Oke Idanre) is yet to be enlisted into the prestigeous World Heritage List. However, it is already in the tentative list of UNESCO. We are still working hard to see it enlisted in the World Heritage List." (This was a response to someone who said "I am highly delighted haven (sic!) as ascertain that idanre kingdom was enlisted as part of the UNESCO World heritage list.")
See http://www.idanreland.org/?p=25#comments

So - at least those involved in the development/promotion of Oke-Idanre, as indicated by this Web site still seem to harbour hopes of WH inscription - one day!!!

Author Assif
Partaker
#10 | Posted: 30 May 2014 17:12 
Thanks, Solivagant, for the input.
My attempt is partially based on speculations. For those sites I gave a NO there are ones belonging to several criteria:
1) Sites for which the official policy is now not to pursue the attempts to gain inscription:
Rouen (France), Heidelberg (Germany), Hohe Tauern (Austria), Tel Dan (Israel), Eastern Arc (Tanzania), Lukovice (Czech Rep.), Tatras (Slovakia), Jerash (Jordan), Darwin (UK)....
2) Sites which were recommended a rejection and have not been pursued since: Durres (Albania), Augostow Canal (Belarus, Poland), Cal Orck'o (Bolivia), Nikopolis (Greece), Demak (Indonesia)... We know that sometimes such decisions can be later converted (see Bolgar), but in most cases it is a good indication the site will not be pursued. This includes sites that were withdrawn and not pursued such as Cesky Raj (Czech Rep.), Baltic Klint (Estonia), Makhteshim (Israel)... since this used to be the only indication regarding bad recommendations from the ABs before they started releasing them ahead of the conference.
3) Sites which were proposed longer than 30 years ago and were never pursued. Again there are exceptions such as Prei Kuk (Cambodia) or Sanganeb (Sudan), but they are very rare.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#11 | Posted: 30 May 2014 17:52 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Regarding the "?" for "Old Dongola"
Another site which has some personal meaning for me! When visiting Sudan in Dec 2005 we camped at Old Dongola and, on Xmas morning, were treated to a personal tour by Dr. Stefan Jakobielski who had been working on the excavations first as a member, then as director of a team from the Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology at Warsaw University since 1965!!! This CV seems to show that he retired in 2006 - http://www.zaspan.waw.pl/jakobielski

I had noticed this bearded man and his team of students when they (with loads of equipment) boarded the same plane for Khartoum from London as we were on. There weren't many of us Europeans taking that route!! In Khartoum we went our respective ways - so it was a great surprise some 7 or 8 days later to be met by the same man as we drove up to the dig HQ. We were really only doing so as a "courtesy" and perhaps with a hope of learning a bit more than was immediately visible from the limited remains poking above the sand ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Dongola )!! There were just 3 of us plus guide and driver but Dr Jakobielski did not stint in showing us round "his dig" including areas not publicly open and rooms full of excavated fragments - mainly pieces of fresco in the process of being of being "reconstituted"!! He gave us far more time than we deserved.

I particularly remember the story he told about the distrust he and his team faced from locals in the early days of his project. For they were excavating remains from the pre-Muslim Christian period in Nubia and there were ("unspoken" at the time but described some years later when trust had been fully created) fears that the real purpose was to resurrect Christianity there!!. Indeed Old Dongola survived the orginal thrust of Islam up the Nile and didn't finally succumb until 1323, at which time the Cathedral was turned into a mosque

Back in 2005 there still seemed to be many years of work remaining - Dr Jakobielski asked that we didn't photograph any of the fresco work we were seeing as nothing had yet been published about them. He made no mention of any possible WH nomination (and i didn't ask him). The most recent Web pages I can find still seem to indicate that significant excavations are continuing.

Old Dongola was "referred" as long ago as 1993!! As to whether in 2014 that "?" should be a "Yes" or a "No" the following questions arise - Have the subsequent excavations helped its case? Are they "complete" enough to satisfy ICOMOS? Does Sudan even want to nominate a significantly Christian site?

Well - I have discovered this from early 2011 - A series of training courses held to assist English-speaking African nations to prepare Nominations. Among the participants were representatives from Sudan - and their choice of site was ....... Old Dongola!! Now that doesn't of course mean that Sudan was/is definitely preparing to move on this site but it would seem to indicate a significant degree of activity!!!

The following links lead to reports of 2 courses. After the first "The participants were then released to proceed to their various countries where they had to actualize the development of the nomination dossiers "
Nov 2010
http://www.awhf.net/beta/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Namibia-Nomin-Report_2_Final.pdf
"Sudan as a state party is working on the site of Old Dongola on the Nile. This interesting site represents various culture as well as religions including Christianity and Islam. The team
from Sudan have been quiet for sometime a fact that may have been due to the transformation going on the country that involve election leading to the separation of the North and the South"


Aug - Sept 2011 -
Contains presentations about an Old Dongola nomination worked up in the period since the first course, together with a critique of its various aspects
http://www.awhf.net/beta/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Final-report-Namibia-course220811 .pdf
In all honesty there doesn't appear to be a great belief in this second report that Sudan was close to resolving the problems which had been identified with the draft nomination. On the other hand the people running the course haven't indicated a "No hope" - so I would have thought that these reports were enough to justify noting a "Yes" against Old Dongola in the "Pending" list!

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#12 | Posted: 1 Jun 2014 05:42 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Suakin = "?"
Forum members might be interested in this preservation history of the town and the likelihood of a future nomination bid for this "Pending" site such as I have been able to garner from the Web.

1920s – Suakin Island port area is gradually abandoned in favour of Port Sudan. Some proposals to repair whilst other areas are closed because of danger
1940s-50s – Surveys by British colonial personnel and proposals for maintenance. Due to lack of money to publish the drawings, this does not happen until 1976 in the "The Coral Buildings of Suakin" (Greenlaw) which has become the main reference document for preservation and restoration.
1968 – F Hinkel (from GDR) produces "Scheme for the Preservation and Maintenance of Suakin" (Not available on Web??)
1972 – UNESCO send a consultant architect (E Hansen). He is also quoted as saying "This is probably the last report to be written on the preservation of Suakin. In a few years there will be nothing more to preserve". His report recommends that restoration could be achieved for a mere LS (Sudanese pounds) 72000! Proposes open air museum etc etc. Lack of money and legal difficulties re ownership means nothing happens (plus incompetent government?)! See http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0000/000066/006626eo.pdf Back in 1972 there was of course no "World Heritage List" at which it could be targeted for inscription!
1976 – "During his last visit to Sudan in 1976 the German architect Hinkel was asked again by the Commissioner of Archaeology to study the situation of Suakin. Since decay had taken a further toll on buildings, Hinkel arrived at a new proposal for the town that called for creation of a historical quarter on the northeast corner of the island comprising 2.6 ha. and placed emphasis on preservation of buildings from the early and middle periods in the island's architectural history. "
1991 – New modern harbour at Suakin further endangers old town
1993 - Unesco sends a mission under Barry Lane and Abdel Rahim Salim. I have not been able to find the official UNESCO report but its general thrust is contained in the non-Unesco paper issued by one of the authors in 1997 below-
1994 – Suakin is placed on Sudan's T List
1996 – Suakin is nominated but is deferred at the Bureau meeting for carrying out of an inventory -unfortunately I have, so far, been unable to get a fuller idea of this nomination and its consideration!
1997 – Article in the TDSR ("Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review") titled "On reviving an Ancient Red Sea Port City" by Abdel Rahim Salim - http://iaste.berkeley.edu/pdfs/08.2f-Spr97salim-sml.pdf . In it he states "An immediate priority has been to convince the Sudan Department of Antiquities to take two steps. One was to perform urgent repairs to the few remaining intact buildings to stop their final deterioration. Fortunately, this step has been taken. The other has been to have Suakin listed as a site in the antiquities ordinance and the World Heritage List" . However he makes NO reference to the earlier "failure" in 1996 and it is not clear whether the intention to gain listing stated here refers to his original recommendations c 1993 or a continuing one after the 1996 deferral.
2002 – "Suakin Project" initiated under the Sudanese National Corporation of Antiquities "The project involves the study of history, archaeology and architecture, together with a programme of building restoration and community outreach.". There are various academic articles indicating that archaeological work under this scheme continues . Eg this from 2014 http://talks.cam.ac.uk/talk/index/50417 stating that University of Cambridge during 7 seasons have carried out excavations at four house-sites, the Governor's residence and one of the two surviving mosques". And this from 2011 - https://www.academia.edu/5620797/Archaeology_and_the_archaeological_and_historical_ev idence_for_the_trade_of_Suakin_Sudan_from_Navigated_Spaces_Connected_Places_Proceedin gs_of_Red_Sea_Project_part_5_
2007 – Mallinson Architects appointed to carry out the "Masterplan" for Suakin – including restoration of ruined houses and 2 new museums (the company had previously worked for UNESCO on the Sudan National Museum in Khartoum)- http://www.mallinsonae.com/Museums/Suakin/#
This 23 minute video featuring Mr Mallinson gives a good feel for what Suakin looked like in 2012 and the status of the Museum work http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osxkQyS1wEg
2011 – In its evaluation of the Saudi Arabian proposal for Jeddah ICOMOS notes under "Comparative analysis" that "Both Suakin and Massawa hardly conserve any traces of their old urban fabric and architecture: Suakin is today reduced to the conditions of an archaeological site"
2013 – Sudan initiates a "Suakin Revitalisation" project as part of a general "East Coast development Plan". This Jun 2012 report refers to development of Suakin as an "International Heritage Site" but doesn't refer specifically to UNESCO World Heritage http://www.centroidpm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Sudan-East-Coast-Development.pps x

My conclusions from all this are
a. UNESCO has long wanted to preserve Suakin but has been unable to muster the necessary resources and actions. The importance of the place seems to be widely accepted in architectural, archaeological and cultural circles
b. Desultory preservation and archaeological work has been taking place through this century and sees likely to continue for many years to come – how much it can halt the ongoing degradation must be a concern. As must whether such restoration work as might occur will be regarded as "authentic"
c. It seems unlikely that the degraded site could ever be presented to UNESCO as a "preserved working town" as per e.g Ilha de Mocambique – whether it could be presented as an "Archaeological site" as per Kilwa Kisiwani – who knows??
d. There is no evidence that Sudan is actively considering pursuing any nomination for Suakin on either basis in the foreseeable future. The most that can be said is that its plans do envisage developing it as a "tourist attraction" – but, given the speed at which things happen in Sudan and its general "travel profile" that might seem to be a problematical objective!

It would seem that the most appropriate "Pending Status" for this deferred site on our list would be "No" – not to say that it will "never" be inscribed but it doesn't seem to be a realistic objective at the moment.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#13 | Posted: 3 Jun 2014 07:25 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Old City of Salt - Jordan = "?"

I have been having a look at the "nomination history" of Al-Salt. Earlier in this Forum thread Els made the reasonable point that, if a site was deferred and didn't get back in straight away, it was back to square one - but behind a lot of newer nominations and, as a result, the nomination was very likely never to see the light of day again! That may well be true in some cases but I am coming to the view that there are a number of sites which were nominated quite early on and got deferred then for good reasons related to the country's lack of experience in producing Nominations accompanied by a failure really to maintain and manage the site properly. Also the WH scheme itself was in relatively early days and has developed considerably in how it supports and assesses nominations. In short -a deferral in the '80s or '90s may indeed mean that a site has nothing to offer but it might also mean that a lot of work has to be done by a lot of bodies before the site could be presented again.

Al-Salt could be such a site. It was indeed deferred in 1994 - but its reappearance on Jordan's T List in 2004 does seem to have been the result of positive action taking place to preserve and develop the city involving players as significant as "The World Bank". I haven't visited the town during any of my 3 visits to Jordan but I was surprised to discover that it had been considered for the status of capital of Jordan and does indeed contain many worthwhile structures.

In 2004/5 The World Bank carried out a fundamental appraisal of this part of Jordan to identify what needed to be done to improve its economic development, standard of living etc etc. Among the various papers it produced was this comment
"The old city is a good example of traditional style architecture, method of construction, and early 19th century human settlement: the buildings in the yellow limestone constitute the main cultural asset of Salt and render it a city worth to be included in the UNESCO world heritage list. There are about 657 of these structures - public and private houses, streets, stairs, but also churches and mosques - scattered within the old salt areas of AL-Qla'a, AL-Jada'a and As-Salalem. Some were successfully renovated and some has not been yet"
See page 6 of 27 in this -
http://www.tourism.jo/en/Documents/Contecno/Salt/SALT-Economic_profile.doc
Now, of course the World Bank isn't the final arbiter in these matters but its conclusion at the same time as Jordan re-affirmed the town on its revised T List suggests strongly that Jordan is working towards a future nomination.

There are a number of documents on the Web relating to the efforts taking place in Salt to preserve its buildings and modernise its infrastructure.
The Jordanian "Royal Scientific Society" is involved - here is the Linkedin profile of the indivdual who helped produce the T List documentation - http://jo.linkedin.com/pub/ranwa-khatib/3b/144/aa
Another example document , with good background regarding the built environment of the town and various ongoing projects by USAID and the Japan Bank for International co-operation, is this PhD paper from as recently as 2012 (It is true however that I can find no mention in it of any activity on the WHS nomination front!)
https://eldorado.tu-dortmund.de/bitstream/2003/29502/1/Dissertation.pdf

I would conclude that Al-Salt is not on Jordan's T List "unreasonably", and that the town, Jordan and the World has moved on a long way since it was deferred back in 1994. A lot of work is ongoing to improve the town's condition and a future nomination is certainly a possibility rather than a "no hoper"

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#14 | Posted: 10 Jun 2014 18:08 | Edited by: winterkjm 

Author winterkjm
Partaker
#15 | Posted: 31 May 2015 19:36 
Pimachiowin Aki (Canada)

Excellent article on how truly unique this nomination is, in one word TRANSFORMATIVE. I sincerely hope its successful in 2016, if inscribed it may very well inspire and carve a path for other Native communities in Canada, the US, and Mexico.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/02/150224-poplar-river-first-nation-ojibwa-ma nitoba-global-warming-conservation/

What are they doing all day in Paris anyway? www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / What are they doing all day in Paris anyway? /
 Pending Sites

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 ®
 ⇑