World Heritage Site

for World Heritage Travellers



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

Extensions

 
Author elsslots
Admin
#1 | Posted: 31 Oct 2021 04:52 | Edited by: elsslots 
Due to popular demand, I've created a connection that provides a list of all the extensions: https://www.worldheritagesite.org/connection/Extended#
It's a copy of the data that was already there in the site history of each WHS.

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#2 | Posted: 4 Nov 2021 15:57 | Edited by: nfmungard 
As for New Zealand, I do not think that the incorporation of Fiordland National Park with other national parks to form Te Wahipounamu "diluted" it, unless what you really meant by "dilution" is taking the focus away from the original inscribed property (though it's pretty clear that you were referring to "devaluating its overall OUV". If anything else, the incorporation further strengthened its OUV--so strong that individual parks would be able to exhibit OUV if each park were to be nominated.

I think both parts would be fine WHS on their own and the area covered is huge:
* South: Stellar Fjords
* North: Beaches, Glaciers, Rainforest
My crying was about getting a tick less... I travelled so far and only got 2 ticks for the trip.

There should still be a bit of science in the extension and the OUV should be the key parameter, and not what somebody likes/dislikes. It was already a topic in the Forum: how many Parises we have

I think Prag has a continuous history as Bohemian capital from Medieval times to at least the end of the Habsburg Empire. I think the OUV would be in there showing what happened in this time period. And I am just worried about the consequences: 10 Seoul WHS, 10 London WHS, 10 Paris WHS, ... Seoul being in the lead I think.

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#3 | Posted: 4 Nov 2021 16:41 
Tried my luck clustering the extensions a bit.

Natural Extensions => Seem natural to me. Or would have assumed that these were always part of the inscription.

Budapest: Andrássy Avenue and the Millennium Underground
Seems fine. Doesn't really change the site itself.

Cordoba: Historic Centre rather than just the Mosque
Technically it's a church, not a mosque. I think walking around Cordoba this ia a natural extension.

Dubrovnik Suburbs, more fortifications and the island of Lokrum
Seems okay.

Granada Albayazin quarter added
Similar to Cordoba. The Alhambra is the jewel, but the town around it forms a consistent set.

High Coast / Kvarken Archipelago Kvarken Archipelago
One geological (?) feature. Two sides of the same coin, so seems consistent. Several other examples of cross border sites exist where one country moves first and the other country then later joins.

Consistent Extensions => I can see a logic why this was added.

Altamira Cave
Seeing Altamira is not accessible I think adding lesser sites is actually a bonus. And it's prehistoric, so more often better.

Asturian Monuments => Camara Santa, the Basilica of San Julian de los Prados, and La Foncalada
Seeing 2 of 3 original sites are in Oviedo, I don't really have a problem with adding more Asturian monuments in Oviedo proper, i.e. in walking distance. I would be less inclined so, if the sites were further removed.

Belfries: French Belfries + 1 Belgian.
The French / Belgian border is a bit artificial. I am not a fan of serial sites, but seeing the Belgian serial is long adding a few French ones doesn't make it worse. Lille is the best anyhow :D

Butrint Hills to the north, the Butrint plain, Lake Bufit, and part of Lake Butrint
Seems okay.

Churches of Moldavia Sucevita Monastery
The site was already a serial site. Sucevita as I understand it is the second best location of the serial site, so fine with me.

Classical Gardens of Suzhou
Sites are sprinkled across town. I think this is a fine addition, also a way of distributing the tourist masses.

Jesuit Missions of the Guaranis To include multiple locations
For me, it's consistent. The sites are great but tiny. To get a proper grasp combining several into a serial seems fine.

Megalithic Temples of Malta 5 extra Temples.
With prehistory I found more locations can add value as you are working with what are mostly ruins. The locations I saw on the main islands were all good and deservedly inscribed.

Extensions for Lesser Sites / Shoehorning => Extensions I don't see as strengthing OUV.

Aggtelek and Slovak Karst => Dobšinská Ice Cave
Looking at the map it seems rather removed from the core zone. I am not sure this was needed, even if the cave is interesting.

Berat and Gjirokastra: Berat
I love Gjirokastra. I have not seen Berat, but both places are far apart, so I don't really get the combination. Either inscribe both separately, or the best.

Bauhaus Sites: Five Houses Dessau-Roßlau, ADGB Trade Union School near Bernau
Dont see how this strengthened the nomination.

Dutch Water Defence Lines
Original inscription already overstretched. Adding more sites doesn't help.

Frontiers of the Roman Empire German Limes 101, Antonine Wall
Debasing Hadrians Wall with German ruins is the original sin of site extensions. Antoines Wall meanwhile felt tangible enough. Still, this should have never be extended.

Imperial Palace Shenyang
Forbidden City should have been a singular site. I can't judge Shenyang, but combing both was wrong and debases the main site.

Redefinition of the Site => Extensions that should have started at square one.

Ferrara Este ducal residences, Landscape Po Delta
Sounds like the nature of the inscription was changed by the extension. Po delta cultural landscape is probably not what was originally deemed to have OUV.

Lima Whole historic city centre
Unlike Cordoba where the Jewish district simply feels as part of the site from the get go, the original ensemble and the surrounding city do not feel as organically one. And in Cordobo you go from worldclass to good. In Lima you go from okay to bad with the extension.

Extensions for Master Data
Calakmul: Extended to include Natural Criteria
Very natural natural and cultural site.

To continue ;)

Author Astraftis
Partaker
#4 | Posted: 4 Nov 2021 19:05 
elsslots:
Due to popular demand, I've created a connection that provides a list of all the extensions: https://www.worldheritagesite.org/connection/Extended#

Great! Thanks, it's a nice "technical" connection!

nfmungard:
Redefinition of the Site => Extensions that should have started at square one.

Ferrara Este ducal residences, Landscape Po Delta
Sounds like the nature of the inscription was changed by the extension. Po delta cultural landscape is probably not what was originally deemed to have OUV.

I agree on the fact that this is one of the most unnatural extensions of the lot and it is actually two WHSs in one, with quite different characters. By the way, it's also not really well presented, and it took me years to notice that the Po Delta is part of it indeed! It is always marketed as the city of Ferrara only and many maps do not show its actual extension! The city surely tends to be the moreattractive and visitwise comfortable part for most.

I think that this extension was the easier way to inscribe the Delta as a WHS instead of putting forth a new candidacy. But in my dream list, these are two separate sites, with the river probably having the upper hand...

At a quick glance over the other extensions, most seem pacific to me. Even if sometimes one wonders if the buffer zone could not be an already existing device to extend a site, all the while singling out what is deemed to be the true highlight, instead of having a megacorezone. I mean, granting the buffer zone a WHS-status too, albeit a minor one.

Author Pavel
Partaker
#5 | Posted: 5 Nov 2021 02:41 | Edited by: Pavel 
Astraftis:
Even if sometimes one wonders if the buffer zone could not be an already existing device to extend a site, all the while singling out what is deemed to be the true highlight, instead of having a megacorezone. I mean, granting the buffer zone a WHS-status too, albeit a minor one.

This was a big issue and one of the sources of problems after the Bialowieza forest extension. They included forests of secondary quality. Locals supported by the Polish government claimed that they take it as a cultural heritage and want to use their own management in contrary to strict protection ...and scientific problem grew up into political conflict.
The same can be said for several parts of Beech forests WHS.

IMHO I take buffer zones and protection zones already as the part of WHS, because they are also unambiguously assigned in the nomination file and guarded by advisory bodies.

Author Solivagant
Partaker
#6 | Posted: 5 Nov 2021 04:08 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Pavel:
IMHO I take buffer zones and protection zones already as the part of WHS, because they are also unambiguously assigned in the nomination file and guarded by advisory bodies.

Except that they are not supposed to contain anything of recognised or claimed "OUV" (I have seen AB evaluations making this point) and their boundaries are designed purely to protect the OUV of the core zone rather than the value of anything inside the buffer zone. I wonder how this "policy" is reconciled with extensions INTO buffer zones, thereby presumably claiming OUV which had not previuosly been recognised (unless the OUV case is amended at the same time)... but i am not clear how many "extensions" are of this type. Most choose an extension area in a different place (??)

Agree however that it is common for places around the World to claim "WHS" status for areas beyond the core zone - Colombia's Coffee Cultural Landscape and Spain's Serra de Tramuntana are 2 egregious cases I have come across where signs with UNESCO logos are scattered far and wide beyond even the buffer zones! No need for "extensions" when they can gain the "touristic" benefits of inscription without doing so.

Have had a quick look through the 86 sites with extensions and I think it is true that relatively few consist of extensions into previously defined Buffer Zones.
a. Many are extended into totally separate areas
b. Some extend sites which were inscribed before Buffer zones were (almost) compulsary.
c. Some extensions are accompanied by a change to the OUV criteria or at least their textual descriptions thereby "changing the rules" as to what consitutes the site's OUV
d. Some are extensions into a different country and therefore not into an existing buffer zone.
e. Some are "extensions" of criteria with no change in boundaries

The 2014 Bialowieza extension certainly seems to be one which did extend into previous buffer zones without altering Criteria or OUV (though it did remove a Criterion used by Belarus).
On the other hand I don't hink that the Budapest extension to Andrassy actually went into any previuos Buffer zone .....and, in any case "developed"/changed the Budapest OUV and Criteria

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#7 | Posted: 7 Nov 2021 04:44 
Solivagant:
Except that they are not supposed to contain anything of recognised or claimed "OUV"

In the case of Ubeda drawing the line around the one plaza seems a bit artificial as buildings from the same period are scattered around town (i.e. in the buffer zone). For Cordoba, I would agree that the OUV was the Mosque/Cathedral, but it is clear to any visitor that the former buffer zone (Jewish district) had OUV. Still, you are right: OUV of the old town of Cordoba is not what was inscribed originally.

My point re Bochnia and Els blog post were precisely on this pattern: Site gets inscribed on narrow OUV and with strict scrutiny. Site gets extended disregarding original OUV and with a laissez faire attitude. Are there any cases where an extension was refused?

Author nfmungard
Partaker
#8 | Posted: 7 Nov 2021 05:12 
Cross Border Extensions
Monte San Giorgio => Italy.
Ohrid Region => Albania
Wadden Sea => Denmark
W-Arly-Pendjari Complex => Burkina Faso and Benin

Sensible Extensions
Panamá=> I think telling the full story of Panama has to include the archeological site.
Rome => I think where to draw the line for Rome will be arbitrary in any case. Also: Rome is an example of a capital where not each and every OUV building gets inscribed on its own.
Works of Antoni Gaudí => Nativity facade and Crypt of Sagrada Familia, Casa Vicens, Casa Battlo, and the Crypt in Colonia Güell => For me fine, the Sagrada Familia is a key building and these are all locally grouped in one town.
Spissky Hrad and Levoca => Close to each other and historic continuity. Seems fine for me.
Strasbourg => Neustadt is just part of the town.

Debasing Extensions
Wieliczka and Bochnia => Bochnia is not on the same level as Wieliczka
Potsdam => Feels like they added everything the Hohenzollern ever built. I think the best is the central park axis + Sanssouci and the Orangerie.
Primeval Beech Forests => Looking at the beech forests in Germany I can't see a true natural forest. And Belgium seems even worse. This should have been a Biosphere site.
Rammelsberg and Goslar => I get the German pitch (that the whole Harz was transformed into one large water management system). But I think sticking to Goslar and it's environment would have sufficed.
Route of Santiago de Compostela => Essentially, you can't move around Northern Spain without running into a serial component, because each and every town claims being linked to the camino. Seeing the original site was already huge and I think this was insensible.

More Serials
Popocatepetl monasteries => Tlaxcala. Not sure this needed more components.
Mountain Railways of India => Nilgiri Mountain Railway, Kalka Shimla Railway => Having ridden thie Nilgiri Railway I shouldn't complain. Tiny treasures, fine wit hme.
Villages with Fortified Churches => Biertan supposedly is the best. Other villages may not offer the same. I am not sure the site needed to be extended by this much.
South China Karst => Feels like they added all sites they couldn't inscribe otherwise. Lijang is well located and nice. It just feels they should have tried for a proper isncription.
Vicenza => I think they went overboard. While I agrue Gaudi is fine, simply adding more (= each and every Palladio) villas seems too much.

Cleanup Activities.
Olympic National Park => New boundaries, to include the coastal strip. Sounds okay.
Piazza del Duomo (Pisa) => Axis. Having been to Pisa, I don't see the need to include anything but the main campo
Pirin National Park => To include high mountain territory in the Pirin Mountains
Plitvice Lakes => To include a further 10,020 ha (catchment area)
Røros => Circumference. I get the idea, but I never saw the need. Focusing on the key area would have been enough.
St. Kilda => Seems okay.
Uluru => cultural criteria

Author Pavel
Partaker
#9 | Posted: 7 Nov 2021 06:33 
nfmungard:
Are there any cases where an extension was refused?

I think quite a lot, but these cases are not in the spotlight. In my mind I have only: 1) Luther Memorials, and 2) several components of Beech forests extension 2021. But maybe I am wrong and there are only these two examples :))

There are also numerous examples of not approved boundary modifications, which is similar category to the extension.
..and also not approved components of serial nominations such as Venetian Works of Defence, or Pskov school (??), or even the Church of Plečnik in Prague (though this has been withdrawn by the state party).

Connections www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Connections /
 Extensions

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 ®
 ⇑