World Heritage Site

The 2024 WHC Session went along swiftly, thanks to the Indian chairperson and some further measures to prevent lengthy discussions. Having to submit written amendments a day before the discussion is a plus, but limiting third-state parties or NGO’s taking the stage is more questionable and I think the WHC should avoid becoming like a Communist Party Meeting from the 1970s. Successful pre-meeting diplomacy was continued from last year, in this case between Japan and the Republic of South Korea regarding the Sado mines.

24 new sites were selected (photo 1 shows one of them, Lençóis Maranhenses). Find below some aspects that warrant a closer look.

1.      Missing WHS

We did not see one removed from our Missing List, but with the inscription of the Marquesas Islands at least for a small part the Rainforests of Polynesia has been filled in.

2.      Most and least connections

For the first time, we tried hard to find connections for the possible new WHS already beforehand. Thanks a lot to all who contributed – I’d gladly continue this next year. Despite all efforts, Vjetrenica Cave and The Flow Country stayed hard to connect – they seem very specialized WHS. Schwerin, Beijing Central Axis and the Al-Faw Cultural landscape have gained the most connections so far, and thus are quite similar to what has been inscribed before.

3.      Inspiring a new connection

A few inscriptions highlighted a subject that had not come to our attention before and/or was little represented on the list so far. Two sites, Badain Jaran and Al-Faw, gave us Hyper-arid. And Vjetrenica was the start of Cave-dwelling fauna.

4.      Not open to tourists

From the new batch, the Al-Faw Cultural Landscape (photo 2) is fully closed to tourists and one of the 3 South African Pleistocene Occupation sites is as well (and access is severely restricted to the other 2 components). Furthermore, Tell Umm Amer in Gaza is obviously out of bounds at the moment, but Gaza has always been very hard to visit for outsiders and this archaeological site has only been uncovered in 1999.

For those who do ‘tick’ one of these three new WHS – please consider carefully whether you truly have visited the site and we would be glad to see a (short) review if you do so.

5.      A high percentage of nominated sites was inscribed

24 new WHS got inscribed, with only 1 Referral left behind and 3 Withdrawals happening before the session started. This results from a more streamlined process established over the years and ICOMOS/IUCN taking more of a ‘glass is half-full’ approach. During this session, for example, ICOMOS helped Burkina Faso to inscribe the Royal Court of Tiébélé. While they rejected all 3 proposed criteria, they came up with another criterion and the State Party was happy to accept that.

Nevertheless, the total of 24 is a normal amount given the historic numbers: 26.6 is the mean average leaving out the 2 recent double WHC sessions.

6.      Which countries are not complete anymore?

The counts for this year’s new WHS are still coming in (I only reopened the checklist yesterday afternoon), but can some keep the 'top' or ‘difficult countries’ complete? At the time of writing, China (4 completionists), Brazil (1), India (1), Iran (4), and South Africa (7) have not been 'reclaimed' yet while they were completed before. 

7.      Notable WHC members

The Zambian delegate, who made his presence last year already known with his “preaching”-speaking style, added to his popularity this time by showing off two different traditional dresses. He also must be commended for speaking mostly from the heart (while still staying coherent) instead of reading prefab statements as the others do. Content-wise, the Lebanese delegate seemed to be the most straight on the subject.

8.      Getting 2 new WHS anyway

For several years, the rule is that only 1 nomination per country is allowed to better balance the list. Still, there are ways to circumvent this. A popular way over the years – especially for European states - has become to take part in a serial transnational nomination led by another state. Germany and the UK this way got to two this year, via the Moravian Church Settlements extension. Also, the lifting of the moratorium on sites of memory has allowed a temporary loophole. Here, Romania (with the help of the Brancusi Ensemble which wasn’t even a Site of Memory, but somehow ended up on the moratorium list) and South Africa profited from taking two this session. From the moratorium list, only the D-Day beaches seem to be left now.

9.      Multiple Cradles of Humankind

During the meeting, claims were made by both Ethiopia and Kenya that they represent the Cradle of Humankind. South Africa already had a claim on this as well and got another site inscribed on this topic. No less than 3 of the new WHS (Melka Kunture, Niah Caves, Pleistocene Occupation Sites) include evidence of early hominid life. And Iran's Hegamataneh was claimed to be the Cradle of Civilization!

10.  Germany is closing in

Germany (54 WHS) is now #3 behind Italy and China on the country ranking, leaving France and Spain behind. During this meeting, the third World Heritage Site in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern was celebrated (Schwerin) – a number that cannot be matched by over 50 State Parties including large ones such as Nigeria, Ghana, Myanmar and Papua New Guinea. The former GDR now has 15 inscribed sites.

Of course it's a bit early to see what the average rating of the 2024 sites will be, but my gut feeling is that it isn’t as bad as the past 2 sessions. What’s your view on this year’s batch?