Title calls it a "CL" (full nomination name = The historic cultural landscape of the Great Copper Mountain in Falun) and ICOMOS recognises this in evaluation (It is also a cultural landscape)

Clearly accepted as a CL by ICOMOS - not clear why not on UNESCO CL List

"It is also a cultural landscape" (AB) and Fowler "Villa d'Este, Tivoli, Italy, inscribed but not recognized as the category 1 cultural landscape which it clearly is;" Page 23

ICOMOS: "the nature of the property as a testimony to a settlement pattern that structured the island rather than a cultural landscape"

The official description states: "The Romanesque churches and the villages where they stand form an excellent example of a cultural landscape that has flourished in harmony with a natural environment that has remained intact to this day." However the Vall de Boi does not feature on the Unesco CL list.

ICOMOS: "The wider nomination should be considered as a collection of cultural landscapes representing distinctive, long-standing, sustainable and living ways of managing water resources"

Clearly described as a CL in 1997 extension

"ICOMOS consulted the State Party about whether the nominated property should be evaluated as a cultural landscape. ICOMOS considers that the presence of the Tai-Ahom for six centuries has contributed to the cultural, historical and spiritual richness of the site, and that the natural landscape was selected and modified for this purpose. (...)the State Party was not in favour of this possibility because of the specific architectural characteristics, the lack of a seamless integration with the natural environment, and the relatively modest size of the nominated property." (Ab Ev)

Proposed as a relict cultural landscape

Clearly described as a CL in 2001 AB evaluation. Is industrial landscape, relict.

AB eval states "ICOMOS recommends that Khangchedzonga National Park, India, be inscribed on the World Heritage List as a cultural landscape on the basis of cultural criteria (iii) and (vi)."

The Nomination File and the AB Ev from IUCN (May 2020) refer to the site as a cultural landscape.

Proposed by India as "a series of cultural landscapes", but ICOMOS found that difficult to support.

Proposed by France as a cultural landscape, but not justified according to ICOMOS in the AB ev.

AB "cannot be said to substantiate the property as a CL that demonstrates an exceptional reflection of Cultural traditions over time". Was this why it wasn't inscribed as CL by UNESCO??

It should also be considered to be a cultural landscape (AB ev)

Proposed as a cultural landscape, and supported as such by ICOMOS: "Tsodilo should be considered as a cultural landscape because it is well qualified in this category of cultural site. It qualifies primarily under category iii, "an associative cultural landscape"

Not officially a CL? - the words are used

AB ev states "Since the entire island is covered by the nomination, it may also be considered to be a cultural landscape", but it is not recognized as such on the UNESCO website.

Nomination says "it is also nominated as a cultural landscape." AB ev: "In its Interim Report, ICOMOS noted that the use of the term ‘Cultural Landscape’ in the name of the property as originally proposed by the State Party could not be said to be entirely appropriate at the present time on the basis of the information provided. In its reply, the State Party agreed with that comment and revised the name of the property from “Sambor Prei Kuk Archaeological Sites Representing the Cultural Landscape of Ancient Ishanapura” to “Sambor Prei Kuk Archaeological Site of Ancient Ishanapura”."

The AB Ev states it "may also be a linear cultural landscape". (Ab Ev)

Clearly descr as a CL in 2010 extension

Clearly nominated as a CL and recognised as such by ICOMOS

Is titled a CL and it was clearly accepted as a CL by ICOMOS -not clear why it isnt on the UNESCO CL List

The Palm Grove may also be considered to conform with the continuing organic cultural landscape (AB ev)

The AB ev states Nikko comprises "a group of buildings in a natural setting laid out by man to form a site, with the value of a cultural and associative landscape, as described in paragraph 39 of the Operational Guidelines", but it is not listed as a CL on the UNESCO website
See www.worldheritagesite.org

Proposed as a cultural landscape and recognized as such according to OUV crit v : a cultural landscape reflecting the ancestral way of life of the Saami people

Specifically descr as a CL in AB eval! No type given - "Assoc" and "Continuing"?

Described in AB as "to be managed as a CL". If so would be "Assoc"?

1999 extension in AB ev described as cultural landscape - crit v of the inscription even says "The Po Delta is an outstanding planned cultural landscape"

AB Ev: "(...) the old quarters and fortress of Luxembourg certainly constitute a cultural landscape, and so the cultural property proposed basically satisfies criterion vi, since it bas been admired by many artists and writers (...)"

Clearly described as a CL in 1997 extension. Relict.

Brought forward as cultural landscape in AB ev

Both the official description and the AB Ev refer to Assisi as a cultural landscape. "Assisi represents a unique example of continuity of a city-sanctuary within its environmental setting from its Umbrian-Roman and medieval origins to the present, represented in the cultural landscape, the religious ensembles, systems of communication, and traditional land-use. (Criterion iii - Official description) – "The territory forms a cultural landscape with natural and human elements, such as settlements, religious ensembles, road systems, traditional systems of cultivation, and agricultural management structures." "Assisi and its built territory represent an outstanding example of an Umbrian hill town and cultural landscape that has maintained its historical stratigraphy since antiquity." (AB Ev)

1997 AB eval states "the Nara Palace Site, the Kasuga-Taisha Compound, and the Kasugayama Primeval Forest are sites, whilst the latter two are also associative cultural landscapes"

Nominated as such, no clear stand from ICOMOS (because negative about the OUV of it all)

The site is referred to as a cultural landscape in the IUCN Evaluation. (IUCN Ev)

AB ev: could also be a cultural landscape

Ani was originally nominated as a cultural landscape, but in a revision dated February 2016, Ani was put forward as an archaeological site by Turkey (ICOMOS regarded "that the comparative analysis is insufficient to demonstrate that the property is an outstanding example of a cultural landscape" AB ev)