Search

This article presents the ambitious potentialities in the use of digital methods and techniques for the documentation of the Nordic architectural heritage and environment. The processes of knowledge, both theoretical and practical, should not ignore the traces of the past, old buildings and traditional constructions. On the contrary, they should serve as a testimony of the past and provide a solid starting point for new, more coherent, sustainable and harmonic urban development. Since the Venice Charter in 1965 up to the more recent international documents such as the Declaration of Amsterdam in 1975 and the Madrid Document in 2011, both the verification of authenticity and understanding of architectural entities and details are getting more insight because of the current technological advancements. However, the methods for the analysis and following these noble principles and declaration articles is still not defined well enough. Each method and practical procedure with specific instruments produce also specific outputs and results, which need to be put in mutual dialogue in order to obtain useful results. These themes are studied and developed in this article by presenting chosen case studies in research projects both on the urban and singular scale with the location in Oulu, Finland.

This year, 40 years have passed since the adoption of the basic document for the protection of historic gardens, i.e., the Florence Charter. During this time, its recommendations have been verified by both conservation and researchers’ actions, who in various environments discussed its meaning as well as its essential shortcomings. Some of the provisions of the Charter were criticized in the context of the effects of their use, especially those relating to the issue of historic gardens fundamental protection, namely to authenticity in its various scopes with particular emphasis on the use of source research which raises many reservations for conservation actions. Moreover, their excessively superficial interpretation, which was demonstrated by the example of the most popular plant used in regular gardens, namely boxwood. This article presents and analyzes the most important theses of these discussions and the main axes of the dispute, dividing them into two parts, i.e., the first relating to authenticity and the other to the use of sources. On this basis, it was necessary to extend these considerations to all kinds of historic greenery. Attention was also paid to the meaning and scope of authenticity which changed along with the expansion of the semantic field in relation to heritage. Furthermore, the fact that since the adoption of the Florence Charter, some of the aspects of authenticity indicated in the article have been included in other documents developed under the auspices of ICOMOS, but usually relating to the heritage as a whole, sometimes considered regionally. Appendices contain the most important doctrinal documents referring separately to authenticity, meaning, as well as types and the scope of the usage of sources. This article presents new contexts in which authenticity connected with climate change and the postulates of the development doctrine should be considered. Additionally, the article indicates the need to extend the conditions in which to start considering the historical greenery areas, which should be treated as an element of green infrastructure. The article also points to the use of new techniques and tools in research on authenticity. The summary indicated the necessity to continue the discussion on aspects of authenticity in relation to historic greenery layouts. Taking into account all the above aspects and at the same time meeting the ICOMOS “Journeys for Authenticity” initiative, As part of the conclusions from the analyzes carried out in the article, a model of procedure was proposed. It aims to bring us closer to the preparation of a new document recommending the protection of historic greenery, addressing both critical comments about the present Florence Charta, as well as new challenges and opportunities. This model is shown by means of a diagram. Part of it is a set of themes around which around which the debate on the new Florence Charter could be launched. They were assigned to four panels, i.e., I. Historic greenery as an element of heritage: II. Authenticity of historic greenery complexes in research and conservation strategies, III. Authenticity of historic greenery complexes and sustainable development, IV. New techniques and tools in research on the authenticity of historic greenery layouts.

Este estudio aborda el debate actual sobre la posible inscripción de bienes vinculados a conflicto en el seno de la Convención de Patrimonio Mundial de UNESCO. Analiza decisiones del Comité de Patrimonio Mundial, tanto recientes como su evolución en el tiempo, junto con lecturas de informes realizados por diversos agentes en la materia. El estudio evidencia las bases y dificultades actuales en torno a la temática y traslada este debate a otras figuras de UNESCO, propuestas de Naciones Unidas en materia de derechos humanos y otros organismos internacionales, de cara a promover vías y caminos para garantizar un debate orientado. De esta manera, se visibiliza y promueve el necesario debate en torno a la patrimonialización de elementos que remiten a conflictos y violaciones de derechos humanos en nuestra historia y que deberá ser también abordado en los próximos años por parte de UNESCO y el Comité de Patrimonio Mundial, entre otros., This study addresses the current debate on the possible inscription of properties linked to conflict within the UNESCO World Heritage Convention. It analyzes decisions of the World Heritage Committee, both recent and their evolution over time, together with perspectives of reports made by various agents in the matter. The study shows current bases and difficulties around the issue and transfers this debate to other UNESCO figures, United Nations proposals on human rights and other international organizations, in order to promote ways and means to guarantee an oriented debate. In this way, the necessary debate around the patrimonialization of elements that refer to conflicts and human rights violations in our history is made visible and promoted, recognising that it should also be addressed in the coming years by UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee, among others.

De Waddenzee is het enige Nederlandse natuurgebied met de status van Unesco Werelderfgoed. Het is zo’n uniek en omvangrijk intergetijdengebied dat de hele wereld het als erfgoed mag beschouwen voor huidige en toekomstige generaties. Maar heeft die status juridisch iets om het lijf of is het vooral een marketinginstrument? En volstaat de huidige inzet om de bijzondere waarden van het Werelderfgoed Waddenzee ‘recht te doen’?

De Waddenzee is het enige Nederlandse natuurgebied met de status van Unesco Werelderfgoed. Het is zo’n uniek en omvangrijk intergetijdengebied dat de hele wereld het als erfgoed mag beschouwen voor huidige en toekomstige generaties. Maar heeft die status juridisch iets om het lijf of is het vooral een marketinginstrument? En volstaat de huidige inzet om de bijzondere waarden van het Werelderfgoed Waddenzee ‘recht te doen’?

This article provides a comprehensive empirical analysis of the composition, development and use of the List of World Heritage in Danger (IDL) under the 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. The statutory records of this Convention have been coded in order to generate an overview of the development and use of the IDL between 1978 and 2017. The quantitative data was further developed by reference to World Heritage and transnational law literature. A key finding of this article is that the IDL serves a dual purpose in regulation: firstly, as a ‘fire alarm’ to alert the international community of imminent dangers at World Heritage sites; secondly, as a non-compliance procedure used for ‘naming and shaming’ states that breach the rules. The findings in this article have relevance for heritage scholars and policy makers concerned with the governance of World Heritage as well as those with a broader interest in non-compliance procedures under transnational environmental law.

This review article assesses the relevance of international wildlife treaties for the conservation and sustainable use of the world’s five species of rhinoceros – white rhino (Ceratotherium simum), black rhino (Diceros bicornis), Indian rhino (Rhinoceros unicornis), Javan rhino (Rhinoceros sondaicus) and Sumatran rhino (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis). The analysis covers global treaties like the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the World Heritage Convention and the Ramsar Wetlands Convention, alongside various regional African treaties. Employing standard legal research methodology combined with relevant knowledge from the natural and social sciences, the focus of the review is both on past performance and future potential of the treaties involved. The outcomes of the analysis suggest that, despite pervasive compliance deficiencies which continue to curtail the effectiveness of the various treaties, the prospects of various rhinoceros populations may well have been (even) worse without some of these treaties. The comparative importance of the World Heritage Convention for the conservation of the three Asian rhino species is an example. The main threat to rhinoceroses – poaching driven by a demand for rhino horn in various Asian countries – is international in nature, and a substantial part of the analysis centers on the international community’s efforts to address this threat over the past four decades within the framework of CITES. A key recommendation flowing from this analysis is for CITES parties to seriously but critically explore alternatives to the current trade ban regime, including the option of a strictly controlled legal trade in rhino horn sourced from viable, sustainably managed populations.

Abstract Cultural heritage around the world continues to be threatened by war. The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (‘1954 Hague Convention’) automatically confers protected status on every cultural property “of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people.” This very universality, however, is also its greatest weakness: it does not provide visibility to individual cultural sites or help military planners and field commanders choose priorities. In addition, the system of Special Protection under the 1954 Hague Convention is in a state of relative dormancy due to its requirement that sites be located an adequate distance from military objectives, and because of the politicization of the inscription process during the Angkor debacle of the 1970s. World Heritage status functions as a stop-gap measure for some sites, but is financially infeasible for most States and, in any case, provides no additional legal protection. The system of Enhanced Protection under the 1999 Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention addresses these shortcomings by uniting three important considerations: wider scope, ease of access, and strong legal protection. This article recommends that States ratify the 1999 Second Protocol, nominate relevant sites and objects for Enhanced Protection, and support the system of Enhanced Protection by providing and requesting financial and technical assistance from the Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. About the Author Seán Fobbe is Chief Legal Officer of RASHID International, a worldwide network of archaeologists, cultural heritage experts, and other professionals dedicated to safeguarding the cultural heritage of Iraq. He leads a team of elite lawyers in their fight to secure the international rule of law, end the destruction of Iraqi heritage, and establish accountability for international crimes. RASHID International is a registered and audited non-profit organization headquartered in Germany. Seán graduated from Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität with a degree in law, earning an award for exceptionally outstanding achievements in international law and a coveted general distinction. He specializes in international law, with a focus on international humanitarian law, human rights law, and cultural heritage law. Twitter: @FobbeSean ORCID: 0000-0003-3808-7730 About RASHID International RASHID International is a worldwide network of archaeologists and cultural heritage experts dedicated to safeguarding and promoting the cultural heritage of Iraq, ancient Mesopotamia. To assist our Iraqi colleagues, we collect and share information, research and expert knowledge, work to raise public awareness, and both develop and execute strategies to protect heritage sites and other cultural property through international cooperation, advocacy and technical assistance. RASHID International is registered as a non-profit organisation in Germany and enjoys charitable tax-exempt status under German law. We are an organisation in special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council since 2019. Learn more about our work at www.rashid-international.org All of our research is available open access here: https://zenodo.org/communities/rashid-international/ &nbsp

This article attempts to highlight the way management plans could contribute to the creation of a common understanding among stakeholders for the protection, enhancement and presentation of monuments in Greece, and to the joint setting of targets among all competent state services for the protection of cultural heritage, along with the civil society organizations with an active role in this context. Specifically, the article investigates how a management plan could incorporate and balance the different responsibilities, priorities and views of all stakeholders and the challenges involved, highlighting the potential of this process to function as a framework for dialogue and effective decision-making on major management issues concerning monuments and their environment.

Önceki dönemlerden ve medeniyetlerden günümüze kalan doğal ve kültürel mirasın tanınması, korunması, sunumu ve bunların gelecek nesillere aktarımı amacıyla UNESCO üye ülkeleri 1972 yılında ‘Dünya Kültürel ve Doğal Mirasının Korunmasına Dair Sözleşme’yi kabul etmişlerdir. Bu Sözleşme’nin kabulünden sonra Dünya Mirası Komitesi ve Dünya Mirası Fonu oluşturularak her ikisi de 1976 yılında aktif hâle getirilmiştir. UNESCO’nun tabiriyle ‘üstün evrensel değer’e sahip nitelikteki doğal ve kültürel yerlerin değerlendirilmesi, bu yerlerin Dünya Mirası Listesi’ne kayıt edilebilmesi ve Dünya Mirası’nın korunması ve yönetiminde taraflara rehberlik etmesi için Komite tarafından çeşitli ölçütler ve koşullar geliştirilmiştir. Sözleşme’ye taraf ülkeler, toprakları üzerindeki Dünya Mirası varlıkların korunma durumları da dâhil olmak üzere Sözleşme’nin uygulanmasıyla ilgili Dünya Mirası Komitesine altı yılda bir periyodik olarak rapor vermektedirler. Dünya Mirası Listesi’nde Türkiye’den toplam 17 miras listelenmektedir. Söz konusu varlıkların Liste’ye giriş yıllarına bakıldığında ilk olarak 1985 yılında üç varlığın Liste’ye dâhil olduğu görülmektedir. Bu varlıklardan ikisi Divriği Ulu Cami ve Darüşşifası (Sivas) ile İstanbul Tarihî Alanları’dır. Çalışmanın konusu olan Göreme Millî Parkı (Nevşehir) ve Kapadokya Kayalık Bölgeleri, aynı yıl Liste’ye dâhil olmuş diğer varlıktır. Göreme Millî Parkı ve Kapadokya’ya ilişkin en son 2014 yılında bir rapor hazırlanmıştır. Raporda ana hatlarıyla eğitim, finansman, hukuk, trafik, planlama ve yönetim alanlarında birtakım eksikliklere yer verilmiştir. Bu çalışma, söz konusu eksikliklere iyileştirici öneriler sunmayı amaçlamıştır., TThe Member States of UNESCO adopted the ‘Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage’ in 1972, which aims at the identification, protection, conservation, presentation, and transmission to future generations of natural and cultural heritage of outstanding universal value. After the adoption of the Convention, a World Heritage Committee and a World Heritage Fund were established, and both have been in operation since 1976. Some criteria and terms have been developed by the Committee in order to inscribe properties on the World Heritage List, evaluate the ‘outstanding universal value’ of properties, and guide States Parties in the protection and management of the World Heritage properties. The States Parties are invited to submit to the Committee a periodic report once in every six years on the application of the Convention, including the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties located on their territories. Turkey has 17 properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. Three properties from Turkey were inscribed on the List for the first time in 1985. Göreme National Park (Nevşehir) and the Rock Sites of Cappadocia is one of them which is the subject of the study. The latest periodic report concerning Göreme National Park and Cappadocia has been published in 2014. The report, generally, states some deficiencies in the education, finance, legislation, traffic, planning, and management areas. This study aims at presenting remedial suggestions to the deficiencies stated in the report.

This article analyses the role of the World Heritage Convention in the Arctic, particularly the role of Indigenous people in environmental protection and governance of natural, mixed and transboundary properties. It outlines the Convention in an Arctic context, profiles Arctic properties on the World Heritage List and Tentative List, and considers Arctic properties that may appear on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It gives detailed consideration to examples of Arctic natural, mixed, and potentially transboundary, properties of greatest significance to Indigenous people with reference to their environmental protection and management. In doing so, it reviews and analyses recent high-level critiques of the application of the Convention in the Arctic. Conclusions follow, the most significant of which is that the Convention and its Operational Guidelines must be reformed to be consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

1972年のユネスコ本会議において採択された世界遺産条約は，2008年10月現在，185の条約加盟国と878ヵ所の世界遺産地域を有し，その規模と知名度，人気から成功している条約と目されることも多い。しかし，1993年に発表されたイコモスの調査報告において，世界遺産は文化遺産に大きく偏り，地域別に見ても，ヨーロッパ・北米に著しく偏っていることが指摘された。また，遺産の内容も，とりわけキリスト教に関する宗教遺跡や世界的に有名な「エリート」遺産に偏っているとされた。このような世界遺産の偏りを是正するために，1994年の世界遺産委員会において「グローバル･ストラテジー（Global Strategy for a Balanced, Representative， and Credible World Heritage List）」の採用が決定した。これは，「バランスがとれ，代表的かつ信頼できる世界遺産リスト」を達成するために，地域間の世界遺産数のバランスや文化遺産と自然遺産のバランスを考慮し，世界遺産概念の多様化を狙ったものである。以降，世界遺産委員会と世界遺産条約事務局であるユネスコ本部世界遺産センターでは，このグローバル･ストラテジーを基本方針として，条約運営を実施することになった。グローバル･ストラテジーの採用から15年，この基本方針の運用はどのようになされたのか，文献調査と筆者の実務経験から検証した。結果として世界遺産概念の多様化は達成されたが，地域間における格差は拡大傾向であることが分かった。また，文化遺産と自然遺産の格差も拡大傾向であった。その理由として，世界遺産新規推薦件数の増加による審査の厳格化が挙げられる。審査の厳格化は，世界遺産登録に関してノウハウや研究蓄積があり，そのための予算も多いヨーロッパなどの先進国に有利な傾向となり，途上国には一層困難なものとなりつつある。このような矛盾を抱えつつも，世界遺産委員会や世界遺産センターではグローバル･ストラテジーに則した政策運営の努力がなされている。

This paper includes the following headings: education public, private, and partnerships, or PPPs come of age; vouching for the future; mobile learning dials up success; U.S. Secretary of Education by Arne Duncan; perspective; compass; and legalese.

Lähes 200 kaupunkia eri puolilta maailmaa on hyväksytty UNESCOn maailmanperintöluetteloon. Väitöstutkimuksen kohteena on maailmanperintökaupunkeja koskeva kansainvälinen arvottamiskeskustelu 1970-luvulta nykypäivään. Paikallisen esimerkkitapauksen, suomalaisen Vanhan Rauman, kautta tutkimus pohtii myös, kuinka ja missä laajuudessa maailmanperinnön kaltainen ylätason abstrakti käsite on tullut osaksi kulttuuriperintöön liittyviä paikallisia määrittelyjä ja käytäntöjä. Tutkimus tuo ilmi maailmanperintöajattelun merkittävän roolin osana 1960-luvulta lähtien voimistunutta kulttuuriperinnön globalisaatiota. Sen lisäksi, että maailmanperintökohteet ovat kansainvälisen matkailun avainkohteita, maailmanperintökomitea on viime vuosina ottanut aktiivisen osapuolen roolin useissa maailmanperintöalueita koskevissa paikallisissa hankkeissa (esim. siltahanke Dresdenin Elbe-joen laaksoon). Maailmanperinnön myötä kulttuuriperinnön arvottamisen ja hoidon käytännöt ovat yhdenmukaistuneet eri puolilla maailmaa, eivät vähiten tutkimuksessa analysoitujen kansainvälisten asiantuntijoiden laatimien kohdearviointien ansiosta. Tutkimus osoittaa, kuinka maailmanperintökaupunkien moninaisten menneisyyksien ja arvottamisen pohja on vuosien saatossa merkittävällä tavalla laajentunut. Samalla tutkimus tekee näkyväksi arvottamiskäytäntöjen pysyvyyden, jopa pysähtyneisyyden. Keskeinen johtopäätös on, että maailmanperintökaupunkeja kuvataan pitkälti vakiintuneiden konventioiden mukaisesti ja vakiintuneisiin arvoihin nojaten, usein monumenttien ryhminä, harmonisina näkyminä ja pysähtyneinä, materiaalisina objekteina, tietyn prosessin lopputuloksina pikemmin kuin jatkuvina prosesseina. Maailmanperintösopimus kirjoitettiin länsimaisen ”kulttuuriperinnön auktorisoidun diskurssin” (Laurajane Smith, 2006) viitekehyksessä, ja sen toteutus on, tarkasteltujen kaupunkiesimerkkien valossa, pitkälti ollut samaisen diskurssin ohjaamaa. Vaihtoehtoisia tulkintoja korostavien ohjelmajulistusten ulottaminen retoriikkaa pidemmälle on ollut haastavaa. Kansainvälisen arvottamisdiskurssin rinnalla tarkasteltuna Vanhan Rauman tapaus tekee näkyväksi kulttuuriperinnön prosessiluonteisuuden ja kiistanalaisuuden kaupunkipolitiikassa. Raumalla suunnitelmat rakentaa vähittäiskaupan suuryksikkö Vanhan Rauman maailmanperinnön suojavyöhykkeelle nousivat debatin kohteeksi vuosina 2004–2006. Huolimatta näkökannoista, joiden mukaan hanke oli maailmanperintöarvon vastainen, se toteutettiin. Kulttuuriperinnön globaalissa maailmassa paikallinen määrittelyvalta Vanhaan Raumaan nähden ei näytä oleellisesti kaventuneen. Heritage is one of the key cultural, social and political phenomena of our late-modern world, and has been subject to accelerating globalization since the 1960s. This research illustrates the key role played by the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention as part of the popular and globalized heritage concern. The implementation of the Convention steers the global heritage agenda by constantly defining and redefining what constitutes heritage and heritage values and by offering the highest-level forum for heritage professionalism. It has contributed to the world-wide unification of heritage valuation and management practices. The World Heritage designation has become a pronounced means for conferring distinctive identities upon places, and for distinguishing between cities vis-à-vis other cities in the global competition between regions and states. This research explores the time-bound and multi-layered construction of outstanding universal value, the key concept for the implementation of the World Heritage idea within the context of cities. With regard to the various levels of heritage, the focus is placed on the global and the local (Old Rauma). The global part is approached primarily through the lens of ICOMOS by examining the statements written by that expert organization with respect to the qualities of World Heritage nominated cities (of which there are altogether 220, both inscribed and rejected). My research discusses the historical construction of the World Heritage idea, the valuation discourses involving World Heritage cities and the politics of representation. It also conveys the widely shared understanding in heritage studies of heritage as a social and cultural construction and a selective relationship to the past from the point of view of the present. Heritage is more than the physical remains of the historical process, or the act of conservation of these remains. Heritage is not a thing but a meaning. The period investigated in this research, from the 1970s up to the present, can without a doubt be labeled as a transformational period within the entire heritage sector, since both the growth of the sector and its conceptual evolvement are clearly visible. Consequently, the World Heritage practice in the beginning of the twenty-first century is very different from that of the late 1970s. It is also clear that a broader understanding of what constitutes a World Heritage city has evolved especially since the mid-1990s – new kinds of cities have been added to the World Heritage List during the past decade; earlier rejected nominations have been re-evaluated; the most straightforward monumental approach has been abandoned; and there has been a widening of a chronological perspective. Equally obvious is that there have been significant limitations and ambiguities connected with this new approach. A central conclusion is that most World Heritage cities, contrary to general proclamations, have been weighed in relation to conventionally articulated artistic, architectural and historical values. They have been described as groups of monuments and buildings, as harmonic and visually pleasing scenes, and as stagnant objects – as end results of a process rather than as ongoing processes. There has been difficulty in articulating the intangible heritage aspects in relation to the tangible elements in a situation where UNESCO needs to remain committed to material heritage. A uniform language has been used in the valuation of cities, and it has been significantly influenced by the standardized process of nomination, evaluation and designation. In several ways, my research further confirms the existence, operation, and power of an internationally working “authorized heritage discourse”, as defined by Australian archaeologist Laurajane Smith (2006). The World Heritage Convention was drafted in conformity with this discourse, and has so far largely remained within its parameters. The analysis of the ICOMOS urban evaluations, even though comprising a diversified construction, has made explicit that the dominant conceptions of heritage are slow to adjust, and that the change is slowest at the level of heritage practice. Whilst the ICOMOS statements on outstanding universal value constitute a narrative concerning altogether 182 places (and the additional 38 places which were not inscribed), addressed more in an abstract manner as a body of text about ‘the city’ and as a discursive construction, this research also adds another perspective. This involves an analysis of the articulation of the concept and the consequences of the discourse at the local level in the post-inscription phase of ‘World Heritage management’. In other words, when exploring the local case study, that of Old Rauma, this research examines how the universalizing concept of outstanding universal value operates in shaping the meanings of a particular heritage site. When viewed side-by-side with the international valuation discourse, the Old Rauma case makes explicit the nature of heritage as a process which builds local identities, which is bound to a particular place and to a particular history, and which involves actions and debates. In 2004 the city of Rauma publicized plans for a large shopping centre development on the northern side of Old Rauma, in an area which had been defined as part of the World Heritage ‘buffer zone’. This city government decision was contested by several lo¬cal groups as well as by the national authority responsible for cultural heritage in Finland, the National Board of Antiquities. All of these entities considered that the project conflicted with Old Rauma’s World Heritage status. In early 2006 the Supreme Administrative Court ruled, in a 4–1 vote, to allow the shopping centre construction. With this decision the Court favored the legality of the local planning process over the international commitments. It is difficult to pinpoint the exact effects of the internationalized heritage discourse on the lower levels of heritage practice. It is clear, however, that the consequences are significant – most international agendas get absorbed into national discourses and practices and via them into their local counterparts. This is also the case with World Heritage and with Old Rauma. However, when we think of the notion of outstanding universal value in particular, what the Old Rauma case makes obvious is the power of the local narrative of a place and heritage. This actually serves as a counter-argument to what was said about the power of the international heritage discourse. International definitions and concepts do not automatically, and without modification, travel to, and become accepted as, part of the local definition of a place. The case of Old Rauma shows that in the localized context, outstanding universal value gets interpreted in a novel manner, in many ways often disconnected from the official statements by ICOMOS and UNESCO. In Rauma, World Heritage and the concept of outstanding universal value were used as rhetorical tools in the construction of heritage narratives of local origin; however, these notions and their use were significantly influenced by the prior narratives and meanings associated with Old Rauma. Therefore, in the world of cultural globalization and globalized memory work, and in opposition to certain other examples such as those of Vienna and Dresden, Old Rauma provides a locally and nationally framed example. Väitöskirja on vain monisteena.

An empirical overview of the UNESCO World Heritage List according to various characteristics is presented. The officially stated intention of the World Heritage List is to protect global heritage. Our focus is on the imbalance of the existing List according to countries and continents. The existing distribution is compared to hypothetical distributions considered �balanced� from different points of view. It turns out that the World Heritage List is unbalanced with respect to a distribution of ites according to population, area or per capita income. This paper wants to reveal facts about the existing distribution, and is designed to help a reasoned discussion to emerge.

América Latina y el Caribe han tenido una presencia realmente desequilibrada en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial de la UNESCO. De los 31 países que han ratificado la Convención de Patrimonio Mundial, sólo 9 mantienen permanente interés en el rescate, conservación, salvaguardia y difusión de sus sitios de valor universal excepcional, mientras que otros 16 han tenido una mínima presencia en el contexto mundial y los 7 restantes nunca han presentado algún expediente de nominación. La Región cuenta actualmente con 124 bienes inscritos: 86 culturales, 35 naturales y 3 mixtos, siendo 2 de ellos transfronterizos (14 % del total mundial)., Latin America and the Caribbean have had a clear unbalanced presence in the UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Of the 31 countries that have ratified the World Heritage Convention, only 9 maintain permanent interest in the rescue, conservation, safeguarding and dissemination of their sites of outstanding universal value, while 16 others have had a minimal presence in the global context and 7 have never submitted any nomination dossier. The Region currently has 124 inscribed properties: 86 cultural, 35 natural and 3 mixed, being 2 of them transboundary properties (14% of world total)., Departamento de Historia del Arte. Universidad de Granada.

El concepto de Valor Universal Excepcional es la clave central de la Convención para la Protección del Patrimonio Mundial Cultural y Natural. Sin embargo, su interpretación e identificación práctica han variado a lo largo de los más de 30 años de su aplicación. Se ha producido un cambio sustancial en la filosofía de la Convención tendente a considerar no sólo a los propios valores patrimoniales sino, sobre todo, a su representatividad geográfica, de forma que el valor universal excepcional, como representativo de los bienes únicos e icónicos del patrimonio mundial ha evolucionado hacia su acepción como ejemplos representativos. Como consecuencia de ello, asistimos a una crisis del valor mítico de la propia Lista y a un continuo cuestionamiento de su credibilidad, cuyos elementos clave son evaluados en este artículo., The concept of outstanding universal value is the central key of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. However, its interpretation and practical identification have changed over the more than 30 years of its implementation. There has been a substantial change in the philosophy of the Convention aimed to consider not only the heritage values themselves, but above all, their geographical representation, so that the outstanding universal value as representative of unique and iconic properties of world heritage has evolved towards its meaning as “representative examples of the best”. As a result we are witnessing a crisis of the mythical value of the List itself and a continual questioning of its credibility, whose key elements are evaluated in this article., Departamento de Historia del Arte. Universidad de Granada

El Centro de Documentación UNESCO-ICOMOS está especializado en la conservación, restauración y gestión de monumentos y sitios históricos. Además, este centro de información contiene la documentación original de los expedientes de todos los bienes culturales inscritos en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial de la UNESCO. El Centro de Documentación quiere convertirse también en un centro internacional de referencia en recursos online en el campo de la conservación del patrimonio., The UNESCO-ICOMOS Documentation Centre is specialized in the conservation, restoration and management of historic monuments and sites. This centre also keeps the original nomination files of all the cultural properties inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List. It intends to become an international resource centre online in the field of conservation of cultural heritage.