Search

This book makes an important contribution to the field of World Heritage studies and to understanding the ways in which the World Heritage system has shaped — and been shaped by — heritage practice...

TheWorld Heritage Convention tasks States Parties to the Convention with the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage on their territory that is considered to be of Outstanding Universal Value (UNESCO 1972: Articles 1, 2, 4). In recent years, the UNESCOWorld Heritage Committee has stressed the need for inscribed World Heritage properties that have demonstrated Outstanding Universal Value to be managed in a people-centered way, while studies have highlighted the benefits that can be derived from World Heritage status if inscription is used motivationally (Rebanks Consulting Ltd and Trends Business Research 2009), and further studies of cultural landscapes, in particular, have drawn attention to the extraordinary resilience of many World Heritage properties in cultural and socio-economic terms (Plieninger and Bieling 2012). All of these considerations demonstrate the need to understand World Heritage properties as dynamic places where inscription can be the catalyst for bringing together dimensions related to culture, the environment, society and economics in a sustainable way. The application of the World Heritage Convention to any particular site should be seen as a process rather than something static. Such a process starts—or should start—with the identification of why a site might have the potential to demonstrate Outstanding Universal Value. Later stages encompass how it might be nominated and how it can achieve resilience and sustainability in the long term, in part through detailed consideration of protection, management, and the other necessary structures. If all stages of this process are to be as effective as possible, there is a need for access to advice and expertise based on knowledge of successful procedures from around the world. Today there are many institutions and individuals who have garnered elements of such relevant experience, particularly within ICOMOS and IUCN. The emergence of the notion of the upstream process is raising key issues in relation to how and when expertise might be selected and deployed effectively. In the past decade, increasingly complex nominations have been emerging. Some of these, such as expansive cultural landscapes or extensive transnational serial heritage & society, Vol. 7 No. 1, May, 2014, 78–82

The idea for this Forum came when I was finishing my latest book: UNESCO, Cultural Heritage, and Outstanding Universal Value (2013). This publication analyzes States Parties’ understandings and interpretations of the notion of “outstanding universal value” in 114 nomination dossiers of sites for inclusion on the World Heritage List, with an eye to how these documents have shaped official presentations of the nation, cultural diversity, sustainability, and authenticity. Problematic issues with the implementation of the World Heritage Convention were identified through these analyses, including implementation of the recommendations from the Global Strategy, the absence of meaningful involvement of local stakeholders at all stages in the process of nomination, or of considerations of the extrinsic rather than intrinsic values of properties. This publication also considered the lack of benchmarks against which to judge the evolution of the state of conservation of properties, as well as the notion of sustainable development and tourism. The “upstream process” was identified as a promising way to solve these identified issues. Nonetheless, to ensure the success of the upstream process, I argue, in the conclusion of this book, that the format of nomination dossiers presented in the Operational Guidelines needs to be revised. This changed format should include whether and how stakeholders’ views and needs have been integrated within the proposed nominations (see also UNESCO 2010:7). At present, one of the few references to local populations in this form is as a “factor affecting the site.” This revised format will ensure that stakeholders are fully integrated within the process of nominating sites on the World Heritage List. This change will be fundamental, considering that local stakeholders are at the forefront of heritage site conservation and management. Such an inclusive approach will ensure that a holistic statement of significance is drafted, which will take account of all the relevant