Preservation of World Heritage Sites in the Modern World

This article discusses the impact of climate change, local and governmental building plans, and human intervention on UNESCO World Heritage Sites. It also elaborates on the preservation of World Heritage sites by UNESCO in the modern world and the environmental limitations of the process.

Sustainable Construction 1
SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION
by (Student’s Name)
Professor’s Name
Institution
Location of Institution
Course
Date

Sustainable Construction 2
Introduction:
UNESCO World Heritage Sites have been deeply impacted by Environmental change as
well as local and national initiatives in the region. This assignment will discuss the impact that
climate change, local and governmental building plans and other factors such as human
intervention on World Heritage sites. The Assignment will discuss the history of World Heritage,
the development of ideology behind ‘endangered’ heritage sites and the laws and
recommendations from UNESCO for the preservation of these sites. The paper will focus on
Maritime Mercantile City as the prime example of the complications of modern urban
development in the preservation of World Heritage sites. The paper will also discuss a few
cases of delisting of Heritage sites from the World Heritage Site list as well. The aim of the
paper is to elaborate on the preservation of World Heritage sites by UNESCO in the modern
world and the environmental limitations of the process (Center, 2018).
Background:
With the formation of the United Nations, the world became more aware of its history.
Many sites around the world were considered a gift, not only to the nation they belonged to; but
the whole world. That is why; in 1965 White House conference presented the idea of a “World
Heritage Trust”. Its aims are famously preserved in history as; “the world's superb natural and
scenic areas and historic sites for the present and the future of the entire world citizenry”. The
proposal was continued by the “International Union of Conservation of Nature” over time and
was eventually proposed to the United Nations Conference on The Human Environment in
1972. On 16th November 1972, the “Convention Concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage” was taken by the General Assembly of the United Nations. On
17th December 1975, the convention was ratified by 19 countries, with 189 signatories who
were a part of the United Nations.
Significance:
The convention is significant because this is the first pact of its kind that brings natural
and cultural heritage preservation together under one inspecting system.
Selection process: The International Council on Monuments and Sites will evaluate the list of
chosen from every country and will be advised on the matter by World Conservation Union. The
World Heritage Committee meets once a year to decide whether the presented sites obey at
least one of the ten selection criteria to choose a World Heritage Site (Cultural tourism, 1993).
There are 1092 World Heritage Sites in 167 states. The highest concentration of World Heritage
Sites is in Italy, followed by China, Spain, France and Germany. As China is one of the most
highly polluted lands in the world while Italy and Spain are highly Mediterranean lands; the

Sustainable Construction 3
impact that government policies and the environment has on the heritage sites around the world
are the reason that UNESCO deemed fit to take clear action for the preservation of its sites.
Heritage Preservation:
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) has stated in its ‘Tourism
Handbook for World Heritage Site Managers’ that “to assist in the proper management of World
Heritage Sites, recommended that all countries signatory to the Convention consider
introduction of domestic legislation to regulate and control the management of World Heritage
Sites within their jurisdiction” (Cultural tourism, 1993). This emphasis on local management of
the Heritage sites goes back to the fact that the preservation of heritage sites was to preserve
the heritage of mother Earth in that geographical location. Only one out of 19 signatories have
enacted proper legislation to preserve the World Heritage Sites in their country. Australia
passed the “1983 World Heritage Properties Conservation Act” that is there to preserve the
World Heritage Sites that are in their jurisdiction. There are many factors that can affect the
World Heritage site located in the country; some of these factors are as follows;
Predicted Problems
The site is certainly going to incur problems that are easy to foresee, as follows;
 The decay of infrastructure
 The Decay of artifacts
 The change or fading of landscape design
 The fading or change in the natural design of the site that takes away the historical
outlook.
 The reduction in original aura
 The deterioration of culturally important features of the site.
Possible Problems
The problems that may occur in the national stance on the heritage site or any other local
perspectives that causes a threat to the heritage status of the site.
 The reduction in protective measures by the country that holds the site.
 Absent or limited intention to conserve the site.
 The regional or local planning that takes away from the site
 The changes by the local authorities
 The destruction caused by natural disasters such as earth quakes and floods.
(Centre, 2018)
Many of the World Heritage Sites are in continuous danger of destruction from any of these
factors.

Sustainable Construction 4
The List of World Heritage in Danger:
The list contains 54 properties from around the world that have deteriorated extensively
and are soon in danger of being changed beyond repair or preservation. If that level of
deterioration occurs, then the site will no longer be considered a World Heritage Site and will be
taken off the list of World Heritage Sites from the UNESCO convention. Many World Heritage
Sites have been stripped of their title by UNESCO due to lack of adherence to the rules and
regulations.
Oman's Arabian Oryx Sanctuary was taken out of the World Heritage Site list in 2007 according
to the government’s wishes.
Dresden Elbe Valley in Germany was taken off the list in 2009.
Bagrati Cathedral in Georgia was stripped off its Heritage Status in 2017 after renovations took
away its authenticity to a significant degree.
A recent study of the Heritage Impact Assessments conducted by the UNESCO from its
inception in 2011 to the year 2016 has to lead to significant findings. The study concludes that a
hundred assessments that were conducted in that time needed to be evaluated from the
perspectives of local and governmental stakeholders and the local sentiments regarding the
process of delisting should also be taken into account. They also emphasized the fact that
heritage value of any site is fluid and should be taken while keeping modern truths in mind
(Patiwael P, Groote P and Vanclay F, 2018).
The Liverpool Landing Stage (1893) William F. Preston © NMGM Image

Sustainable Construction 5
Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City
This is one of the most compelling examples of modern development reducing the
authenticity of the Heritage site. Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City was established in Liverpool
during the British Empire. It was the Centre of trade and is reminiscent of British rule and
Western Imperialism. The site has been a pride and joy ever since the ratification of the
convention. But in 2012, the construction of Liverpool Waters- renovation of the historic
docklands in the North was proposed. The project would alter the Liverpool skyline and interfere
with the connectivity and congruence of all the buildings in the original dock. In 2012, the
Liverpool management was informed by the World Heritage Committee that if the renovation
project is completed, the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City will be taken off the heritage site list.
The warning was reiterated in July 2017 as the project continues due to a need for employment
and growth opportunities or the city. Here, the study by Patiwael, Groote and Vanclay come to
mind in order to elaborate the modern perspective.
The understanding of modern needs of a local community is the key to understanding
any stakeholders in a World Heritage Site preservation effort as that will decide the fate of the
World Heritage Site list .The renovation efforts are to vitalize the city using leftover spaces
between the dockyards that are not in use. 750 million Euros have been invested in the
maintenance of the Heritage Site considering that the site is massive and its preservation
through the years was a challenging task. However, UNESCO has forewarned the Mayor of
Liverpool that if Liverpool waters project is not abandoned, then the Maritime Mercantile City will
be stripped of its World Heritage Site List in as early as 2018. The action is similar to the
stripping of Dresden Elbe Valley of its World Heritage Site title because a four-way bridge was
built into the city against expressed wishes of the World Heritage Site committee. The decision
to build the bridge came due to the need to reduce traffic congestion. It could have been taken
without any interference, as a minor change by UNESCO but the preservation committee
showed intense interest in preserving the original site. These guidelines are coming out as
narrow and hard to comply with on many fronts (Anon, 2018).
The Global Perspective:
Many areas in the World Heritage Sites list come from Arab or Asian countries that are
ridden with war and religious strife. The heritage that will be most missed by the world is that of
Syria. Syria is the cradle of human culture; the heritage of mankind was born in this land. The
one city hosted some of the most celebrated and now most mourned heritage sites in the world.

Sustainable Construction 6
Syria lost almost half a million human lives in the past five years according to the United
Nations. As much as the loss of human life is the greatest loss; Syria hosted its World Heritage
sites that are all, now, lost. Some were destroyed in the bombing while others were deliberately
plumaged by the terrorist attack. Palmyra’s Arch of Triumph is a celebrated 2000-year-old
heritage site; it was deliberately destroyed by terrorist.
The ancient city of Basra, a hub of Islamic heritage, was also greatly diminished in the
war along with ‘Crac des Chevaliers’- a medieval castle of great significance was both
destroyed. The cities of Damascus and Aleppo are both ruined and cannot be restored to their
former historical grandeur (Anon, 2018). As these are all acts of deliberate violence and strife;
that have left these sites completely unrecognizable. These sites are lost to the worst of
humanity; the bitter geopolitical strife that comes with regional unrest. Similar cases can be
observed in Afghanistan where the Persian Empire was most significantly preserved. But with
the invasion of the Taliban, the looting of Afghan heritage began that continued for two decades.
Virtually no archaeological site is left in that area to preserve and appreciate (Hammer et al.,
2018). Again, the world was not given any choice whatsoever in playing any role in the
preservation of the Heritage site.
Climate Change:
The climate change also plays a significant role in deciding the fate of World Heritage
sites. In Australia, the Great Barrier Reef is considered the most iconic Australian treasure. The
Reef is worth $42 Billion and is responsible for 64000 jobs in Australia. It is also massively
affected by the recent climate change with two-thirds of the reef dying out due to recent
bleaching. “This is the largest living structure on earth and world’s most complex and diverse
natural ecosystem”; according to Great Barrier Reef Foundation director Steve Sargent.
Australia recently conducted 400,000 dollars’ worth of lobbying to make sure that the Reef was
not placed in the ‘Dangered’ list by the World Heritage Sites committee. UNESCO made the
decision after viewing Australia’s Reef 2050 Plan that is seen by many as impractical.
As this is the most significant World Heritage Site that was impacted by climate change; it was
the best perspective to begin a discussion.
A study published this month has come up with significant new insights into climate
change and its impact on the World Heritage Sites in the Mediterranean region (Reimann et al.,
2018). 49 of UNESCO’s World Heritage sites are located in the coastal regions of the
Mediterranean Sea including Turkey and Italy. Forty-Seven of these sites are in direct danger of
submersion in 2100 because the chances of flooding in this region will increase fifty per cent by
that time.

Sustainable Construction 7
Present Status:
In the light of all of these factors, the present-day efforts of World Heritage Site
preservations are greatly challenged by natural as well as man-made calamities. Between
intense warring regions hosting some of the most treasured heritage sites with irreplaceable
value and the most iconic heritage sites of Italy expected to not survive the end of this century;
UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites preservation committee has challenging times ahead.
Perhaps the committee should heed the modern research community and lower its standards of
preservation in Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) guidelines. Perhaps now is not the time to
exclude the well preserved and locally celebrated cites such as Liverpool Maritime Mercantile
City and the Dresden Elbe Valley for minor modifications that come with the age of modernity.
Causes of Environmental Change on Urban UNESCO
According to the report which was released recently by the United Nations Environment
and UNESCO, the change in the environment has become one of the greatest risk affecting the
world heritage sites. Some of the world heritage sites have been associated with certain
elements such as rising temperature, longer wildfire seasons, droughts, melting glaciers,
intensifying weather events, and rising seas among others. There are a variety of factors which
have been considered to be some of the major causes of environmental change in the world
heritage sites. The factors include;
Increased Human Activities
There are numerous cases which have been reported relating to the different human
activities in the world heritage sites which have typically resulted in a change in the
environment. Some of the human activities which have impacted greatly on the environment
entail, logging, roadworks, mining, urban development and railway construction among others.
The clearing of the forests located in the world heritage sites for instance for purposes such as
timber and agriculture has resulted in wiping off of the tree cover and this has also led to the
environmental change in the world heritage sites (Jaafar, Noor, and Rasoolimanesh, 2015
p.160).
An assessment by UNESCO indicated that there are over 203 world’s heritage sites
which have already been affected by such human activities. Also, it has been established that
there has been a lot of increased pressure from human beings which has resulted in forest loss
in most of the forested natural world heritage sites. Such an aspect has typically impacted
adversely the outstanding value of the world heritage sites.

Sustainable Construction 8
Increased Growth of Population
The rising population is the other cause of the environmental change in the world
heritage sites. The natural sites have been exposed to a certain level of threats by the
population pressure and this is mostly in the Asia-Pacific region (Jaafar et al.2015 p.160).
.According to the recent report which was released by UNESCO, it was found out that the rise in
population in the urban centers has grown everywhere and this is particularly in the world
heritage sites.
Effects of Environmental Change
The change in the environment has had a number of implications on the world heritage
sites. Some of the effects related to the marine world heritage sites. It has been proved that
about seventy of the deep sea corals have been greatly affected by the environmental changes
causing a change in the climate. The ocean acidification and the rising temperature are
considered to be some of the elements which are likely to affect the deep sea corals. There is
also the likely effect of the environmental change associated with the increase in soil moisture
which is a result of flooding and such an event could lead to the increase in saline crystallization
particularly on the surfaces which have been built. According to Coles et al. (2015 p.10), such
surfaces could be damaged resulting into surfaces which are decorated. Also, the increase in
the level of humidity due change in the environment could also result in subsidence and ground
heave. Further, the change in environment is likely to cause pollution in the world heritage sites.
The other effect would be on the biological events which entail relationships existing
between the prey and predator and flowering among others. Additionally, the effect of the
environmental change would be on the biodiversity on land. A key world heritage site which is
likely to be affected by the environmental change is that of Cape Floral Region Protected Areas
located in South Africa (Marzeion and Levermann, 2014 p.034001).
List of World Heritage Sites Likely to be Affected by Environmental Changes
Australia’s Great Barrier Reef due to coral bleaching caused by warm water
temperatures
The Great Barrier Reef is located within the coastal part of the Queensland in north
eastern Australia. It is has been considered as one of the largest living on earth. Apart from
that it can be seen clearly from the outer space. The species of this World Heritage Site
include, the sharks, dolphins, turtles, starfish, fish and molluscs. It is one of the best marine
areas around the world. However due to changes in the environment, the site has begun to
reduce in size. There has been coral bleaching which has been associated with warm

Sustainable Construction 9
temperatures. The Great Barrier Reef has been marked as one of the World Heritage Sites
likely to be affected negatively by the environmental changes.
South Africa’s Cape Floral Region due to dryer climate.
The South Africa’s Cape Floral Region is one of the biodiversity hotspot in the world.It is
made up of about 13 areas which are under protection and this is especially in Eastern and
Western Cape provinces.Such protected areas are also used in the conservation of
biological,evolutionary and ecological porceess which relates to the beautiful fynbos vegetaion.It
was listed in the World Heritage Sites List in 2004.Additionally,it has been considered as one of
the floral kingdoms of the world and it is typically diverse.Recently,there has been certain
chnages in the environemnt which is expected to have a negative effect on the site.The dryer
climate has been the main cause of drying vegetation of the site.The Cape Floral Rgeion has
therefore been marked as one of the World Heritage Sites which are dangeriously going to be
affected by the changes in the environment.

Sustainable Construction 10
Mitigation at the Local Authorities, National and International Level
There are several efforts which have been taken by the government through the local
authorities to ensure that the effects of the environmental change are mitigated. A key
intervention strategy entails, the development of policies by the government aimed at reducing
the emissions of carbon related materials in the world heritage sites. Such an action will typically
decrease the level of adverse effects on the environment. The other mitigation strategy is
communication by different nations all over the world where the world heritage sites are located.
The communication is mainly aimed at conveying of knowledge on the effects of environment on
the world heritage sites and there has been a UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
Conference (Job, Becken and Lane, 2017 p.1700).
Precautions.
After Italy, the most found heritage Sites are in China that is the cradle of Buddhism.
With the recent decline in funding for World heritage fund, perhaps UNESCO should reevaluate
its priorities (Center; 2018).UNESCO’s efforts for the preservation of the Heritage sites that are
going to survive this century are of extreme significance. Now, more than ever, UNESCO should
pull itself out of the overt lobbying and political tugs of war and focus its efforts on making sure
that all the sites that can be preserved are taken into serious consideration.
Global initiatives should be launched to promote the significance of preservation and awareness
on global as well as local level should be enhanced. Insignificant changes in the local landscape
should not be allowed to come in the way of historical preservations.

Sustainable Construction 11
REFERENCES
Anon, 2017. Gelati Monastery, Georgia, removed from UNESCO's List of World Heritage in
Danger. UNESCO. Available at: https://en.unesco.org/news/gelati-monastery-georgia-removed-
unesco-s-list-world-heritage-danger [Accessed November 4, 2018].
Author, N., 2017. Georgia's medieval Bagrati Cathedral removed from UNESCO cultural
heritage list. Georgian Journal. Available at: https://www.georgianjournal.ge/culture/33639-
georgias-medieval-bagrati-cathedral-removed-from-unesco-cultural-heritage-list.html [Accessed
November 4, 2018].
Centre, U. (2018). Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage. [online] Whc.unesco.org. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/
[Accessed 19 Oct. 2018].
Centre, U. (2018). World Heritage Fund. [online] Whc.unesco.org. Available at:
https://whc.unesco.org/en/world-heritage-fund/ [Accessed 19 Oct. 2018].
Centre, U. (2018). World Heritage in Danger. [online] Whc.unesco.org. Available at:
https://whc.unesco.org/en/158/ [Accessed 18 Oct. 2018].
Centre, U.N.E.S.C.O.W.H., 2004. Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City. Documents - UNESCO
World Heritage Centre. Available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150/documentst / [Accessed
November 4, 2018].
Centre, U.N.E.S.C.O.W.H., 2007. Arabian Oryx Sanctuary. UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/654 [Accessed November 4, 2018].
Centre, U.N.E.S.C.O.W.H., 2007. Oman's Arabian Oryx Sanctuary: first site ever to be deleted
from UNESCO's World Heritage List. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/362 [Accessed November 4, 2018].
Centre, U.N.E.S.C.O.W.H., 2009. Dresden Elbe Valley. UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1156 [Accessed November 4, 2018].

Sustainable Construction 12
Centre, U.N.E.S.C.O.W.H., 2009. Dresden is deleted from UNESCO's World Heritage List.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/522 [Accessed
November 4, 2018].
Conolly, K, 2009. The bridge takes Dresden off Unesco world heritage list,
Cultural tourism. (1993). International Council on Monuments & Sites, p.5.
Hammer, E., Seifried, R., Franklin, K. and Lauricella, A. (2018). Remote assessments of the
archaeological heritage situation in Afghanistan. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 33, pp.125-144.
https://www.academia.edu/36334300/Hammer_E._R._Seifried_K._Franklin_and_A._Lauricella.
_2018._Remote_Assessments_of_the_Archaeological_Heritage_Situation_in_Afghanistan
Henderson, E, 2016. Syria's six UNESCO World Heritage Sites all damaged or destroyed during
the civil war. Independent, 16 March 2016. 2.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrias-six-unesco-world-heritage-sites-
all-damaged-or-destroyed-during-civil-war-a6934026.html
https://www.icomos.org/en/116-english-categories/resources/publications?start=63
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
325369279_Improving_heritage_impact_assessment_an_analytical_critique_of_the_ICOMOS_
guidelines
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jun/25/dresden-bridge-unesco-heritage-status
Patiwael, P., Groote, P. and Vanclay, F. (2018). Improving heritage impact assessment: an
analytical critique of the ICOMOS guidelines. International Journal of Heritage Studies, pp.1-15.
The Guardian, 25 July 2009.
Reimann, L., Vafeidis, A., Brown, S., Hinkel, J. and Tol, R. (2018). Mediterranean UNESCO
World Heritage at risk from coastal flooding and erosion due to sea-level rise. Nature
Communications, 9(1).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6191433/

Sustainable Construction 13
Coles, R.G., Rasheed, M.A., McKenzie, L.J., Grech, A., York, P.H., Sheaves, M., McKenna, S.
and Bryant, C., 2015. The Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area seagrasses: managing this
iconic Australian ecosystem resource for the future. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 153,
pp.A1-A12.
Jaafar, M., Noor, S.M. and Rasoolimanesh, S.M., 2015. Perception of young local residents
toward sustainable conservation programmes: A case study of the Lenggong World Cultural
Heritage Site. Tourism Management, 48, pp.154-163.
Job, H., Becken, S. and Lane, B., 2017. Protected Areas in a neoliberal world and the role of
tourism in supporting conservation and sustainable development: an assessment of strategic
planning, zoning, impact monitoring, and tourism management at natural World Heritage
Sites. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(12), pp.1697-1718.
Marzeion, B. and Levermann, A., 2014. Loss of cultural world heritage and currently inhabited
places to sea-level rise. Environmental Research Letters, 9(3), p.034001.