PREPARING WORLD HERITAGE (WH) NOMINATIONS: NATURAL .
//PREPARING WORLDHERITAGE (WH)NOMINATIONS: NATURALHERITAGE PERSPECTIVESDAVID SHEPPARDDecember, 2019
THIS PRESENTATION WILL// Introduce WH and thenomination process fornatural WH sites Suggest implications forthis workshop
World HeritageConvention:These sites are themost important andsignificant naturaland cultural areas onearth – and areinscribed under oneor more of fournatural criteria andsix cultural criteria
World Heritage: as at December, 2019,a global List of1,121 sites, comprising 869 culturalproperties, 213 natural properties,and 39 mixed sites
WORLD HERITAGE IS GUIDED BY OUV//“Outstanding universal value means culturaland/or natural significance which is soexceptional as to transcend national boundariesand to be of common importance for present andfuture generations of all humanity. As such, thepermanent protection of this heritage is of thehighest importance to the international communityas a whole”Paragraph 49 of the WH Operational Guidelines
The 3 pillars of the concept of Outstanding Universal ValuePROTECTIONMANAGEMENTINTEGRITYCRITERIA METOUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUEAll pillars must be in place for Outstanding Universal Value to bedemonstrated. Operational Guidelines: Paragraphs 77 & 78
,perational Guidelines,for thelmplementadoo of theWorld Heritage ConventionUNIT,F·oRLDOperational Guidelinesprovide the “bible” for theImplementation of theWorld Heritage Convention· rRLDHERI
--Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) Determinant:Outstanding Universal ValueSites nominated individually orserially can cross the threshold ifthey meet one or more WHcriteria and stringentrequirements of integrity Potential OUV (T/Lists) IRegional Sites and Networks(e.g. Natura 2000, ASEAN Heritage Parks)Sub-Regional SitesEmphasis:Representativeness: ecosystem,landscape, habitat and speciesconservation through effective PAsystems and ecological networks(e.g. transboundary PAs, Peace Parks)National Sites/PA Systems(e.g. national parks, nature reserves, private reserves, monuments,NGO designations such as IBAs, ecological networks)Sub-National Sites(e.g. regional parks, provincial and district reserves) TRelationship of World Heritage Sites to other types of protected areas (PAs) in terms ofOutstanding Universal Value versus Representativeness as key rnationalRecognition-
IUCN EVALUATION PROCESS – KEYPRINCIPLES// The World Heritage List is a select list of sites of outstandinguniversal value, and the Advisory Bodies should be as rigorousas possible in evaluations (Operational Guidelines) Partnership with the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS andICCROM, and UNEP-WCMC; Promotion of World Heritage properties as “flagships” of naturaland cultural conservation; Use of IUCN and other specialist networks - including with IUCNWorld Commission for Protected Areas, Species SurvivalCommission as well as with partners such as the InternationalUnion of Geological Sciences (IUGS)
IUCN Technical Evaluation Report toWorld Heritage CommitteeIUCN World Heritage PanelMissionarranged inpartnershipwith StateParty.FieldMission (1-2 experts)Consultation withNational and LocalAuthorities, LocalCommunities, NGOs,Other StakeholdersIUCN World Heritage ProgrammeNomination Dossiers fromWorld Heritage CentreExchange of letterswith State Partybefore and afterPanel as required.Supplementaryinformation.Meetings if possible.Calls, email frequent.ExternalReviews(10-20experts)Exchange ofletters with StateParty beforemission,includingquestions.
IUCN EVALUATION PROCESS –ASSESSING OUV Field evaluation mission in collaboration with thenominating State Party and key stakeholders Global comparative analysis to assess globalsignificance - comparing the property with similarproperties within the same region is not enough Desktop reviews, by global experts/organisations inareas covered in the nomination document Use of IUCN WH Thematic Studies, rigorous peerreviewed studies, for thematic areas and for naturalcriteria UNEP-WCMC Comparative Analysis for all nominatedsites//
Case study: Papahänaumokuäkea (United States of America)------------------- 25,fi· Endenic20Figure 3 . 5: Comparison of World Heritage Site reef lishenden1isn1 rates(So ue? PMNM)
IUCN EVALUATION PROCESS –ASSESSING INTEGRITY// Field Missions play a key role Assessment of boundaries, are theyadequate and large enough to protectproposed OUV. What are the threats and impact on OUV,are they identified and managed Justification for Serial or Transboundaryproposals
CORAL REEFS OFNEWCALEDONIA
1t1i-o-o"Eii!,'164"0'0'f-1Recifs d'EntrecasteauxI.Biens, Zones Tampons Marines, Zones Tampons TerrestresInscription du recif neo-caledonien au patrimoine mondial de !'UNESCOGrand LagonNordIL.Jrt\\- ,-IZone CotiereQuestt-NLegendeZones inscrites Zones tampons marinesmZones tampons terrestres,.,. -- :::11- i -02550100150Kilometres,.,.
THREATSTHREATS NEEDNEED TOTO BEBE ASSESSEDASSESSEDSuch as tourism and loss of marine biodiversity fromdestructive fisheries practices and coral bleaching
1,600ActualGrowth in International Travel1,400.Forecast . South Asia1,200I Middle East Africa1,000I East Asia/Pacific 800AmericasArrivals,MillionsI EurqJe600o.Source: UNWTO19501960197019801990200020103rd InternationalConference onWorld NaturalHeritage6-8 November2007 E’MeishanCity, SichuanProvince, China2020
IUCN EVALUATION PROCESS – ASSESSINGPROTECTION AND MANAGEMENTREQUIREMENTS// Field Missions play a key role Level of protection status Management authority andManagement Plan Buffer zone protection in surroundingarea
Sichuan Giant PandaSancuaries (China)
U w1U:lU;:su4U1 ' ilometers31 30' O"N)11 !.WY Es31 o· o"Nj;:RIH/Ht:tli8.J0.!!1/IJ.f'I' - *AZE aIBA .r. ,{[030 30' 0"Ntowns hipo * C rl .'HKffii'11 rl30 O' O"'NU n i ted N.ation .slucotion o l . S c i o ntlflc o ndC u l turo l O r o9n l"2::et ionO r g.;tnhJ tiondos N .; .i.tio n s Uniosp o u r l"Qducotion ,lo scie n ce e t le, cult ureOro o ni c i6ndo Ins N oci o n os U n idttsp,:u·n l{il E c;h.1c;;: u ;;l6n,l ,9 C i e n ci,9 y l9 C ult u r E10Convontlon d upat.rlmolne mondl aleConvencl6n delpatrlmonlo mundl al
10 IMPLICATIONS FOR US PACIFICTERRITORIES AND WORLD HERITAGE (1) The process is rigorous and extensive.Excellent preparation is required (2) Essential to document proposed OUV, bycomparison with existing WH sites in the Pacificand globally. It is important to note there arealready some very large marine WH sites in thePacific (3) Focus on globally significant features suchas, for example, hydrothermal vents in theMarianas trench Marine National Monument//
10 IMPLICATIONS FOR US PACIFICTERRITORIES AND WORLD HERITAGE// (4)Ensure conditions of integrity are met (5) Ensure protection/managementconditions are met (6) Consider options for Serial WHproperties e.g. may potentially berelevant for Pacific Remote IslandMarine national Monument
10 IMPLICATIONS FOR US PACIFICTERRITORIES AND WORLD HERITAGE// (7) Nominations from US PacificTerritories will need to be put forward bythe State Party (US) and thus must bean integral part of the US World Heritagenomination process and priorities (8) Compact of Free Associationcountries (RMI, FSM) can and have putforward their own WH nominations
10 IMPLICATIONS FOR US PACIFICTERRITORIES AND WORLD HERITAGE// (9) Consider opportunities for Mixed(Natural and Cultural) nominations, giventhe close nature/culture links in thePacific (10) Learn from other examples, such asRock Islands in Palau, what worked, andwhat didn’t work for their nominations,and subsequent inscription
THANKYOU
Partnership with the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM, and UNEP-WCMC; Promotion of World Heritage properties as “flagships” of natural and cultural conservation; Use of IUCN and other specialist networks - including with IUCN World Commission for Protected Areas, Species Survival
1. The World Heritage Convention and its Operational Guidelines consistently refer to World Heritage Sites as ‘Properties’ (i.e., the area of land inscribed on the World Heritage List is a “property”). The term World Heritage property is therefore used throughout this report in preference to the term World Heritage site.
Heritage Local Planning Policy Framework, particularly Clause 22.05 – Heritage Policy Clause 43.01 – Heritage Overlay and Schedule to the Heritage Overlay Reference Documents – Heritage Studies 4. Methodology The scope and format of the Bayside Heritage Action Plan 2017 was informed by Heritage
STATE OF HERITAGE REVIEW Local Heritage 2020 STATE OF HERITAGE REVIEW Local Heritage 2020 Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please telephone the Heritage Council of Victoria on 9651 5060, or email heritage.council@delwp.vic.gov.au. This document is also available on the internet at
World Heritage Convention and the Operational Guidelines in full. Introduction and Reader’s Guide This Resource Manual is one of a planned series of World Heritage Resource Manuals to be prepared by the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee: IUCN, ICOMOS and ICCROM.
Nominations announced for Olivier Awards 2020 with Mastercard - New British musical & Juliet leads the field with nine nominations - Eight nominations for Trevor Nunn’s revival of Fiddler On The Roof, with seven for Broadway transfer Dear Evan Hansen
1.1 World Heritage and the World Heritage Convention 1.1.1 World Heritage is the designation for places that are of ‘outstanding universal value’ to humanity and, as such, have been inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List to be protected for future generations to appreciate and enjoy.
The IUCN World Heritage Programme provides support, advice and training to site managers, governments, scientists and local communities. The IUCN World Heritage Programme also initiates innovative ways to enhance the role of the World Heritage Convention in protecting the planet’s biodiversity and natural heritage, and in positioning the .
ANIMAL NUTRITION Tele-webconference, 27 November, 10 and 11 December 2020 (Agreed on 17 December 2020) Participants Working Group Members:1 Vasileios Bampidis (Chair), Noël Dierick, Jürgen Gropp, Maryline Kouba, Marta López-Alonso, Secundino López Puente, Giovanna Martelli, Alena Pechová, Mariana Petkova and Guido Rychen Hearing Experts: Not Applicable European Commission and/or Member .
