National Geographic - re Galapagos
"But this first of all World Heritage sites has experienced some positive changes in recent years"
Then elsewhere in the same article
"The GalĂˇpagos Islands were among the first group of sites added to the World Heritage List in 1978."
Which is correct?!!http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/travel/world-heritage/galapagos-islands/
If you actually read the published minutes of the WHC the 12 sites are listed alphabetically by country but with no clear logic for the sequencing WITHIN country (ie it isn't by alpha or Cultural/Natural). Indeed Canada comes first with L'Anse aux Meadows
The minutes indicate that discussion took place first of all on 3 sites for deferral (E.g Ichkeul)and THEN the 12 other sites were all inscribed. But no indication is given that I can divine regarding the sequence in which they were discussed. I suspect those early WHCs didn't operate like the recent WHCs we have seen on webcasts with lots of debate and politics! They may not even have actually "discussed" anything but just taken what the earlier "Bureau" meeting had given them. The 1978 Bureau was in Paris in May and the 1978 WHC in Washington on 5-8 September.
The Minutes of the Bureau are here http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1978/cc-78-conf010-3e.pdf
It is interesting that they discussed Natural and Cultural sites separately (as they still do) -with Cultural sites apparently getting "first bite" at the Bureau anyway
So -did they discuss them in
a. Cultural or Natural sequence
b. Alphabetic Country sequence
c. ID sequence (With Galapagos apparently No 1)
d. Not at all but just taking the 12 recommended by the Bureau as a block in a "done deal"?
Who knows? But UNESCO's 40th Anniversary document didn't HAVE to nominate just one site as the very first.