HERITAGE IN PERIL: A CRITIQUE OF UNESCO’S WORLD HERITAGE PROGRAM

Heritage in Peril: A Critique of UNESCO's World Heritage ProgramVolume 10 Issue 3
2011
Heritage in Peril: A Critique of UNESCO's World Heritage Program Heritage in Peril: A Critique of UNESCO's World Heritage Program
Elizabeth Betsy Keough Washington University School of Law
Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies
Part of the International Law Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Elizabeth Betsy Keough, Heritage in Peril: A Critique of UNESCO's World Heritage Program, 10 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 593 (2011), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol10/iss3/5
This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Global Studies Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected].
UNESCO’S WORLD HERITAGE PROGRAM
I. INTRODUCTION
In the wake of the 2001 bombing of the Bamiyan Buddhas in
Afghanistan by the Taliban 1 and, more recently, the United States‘ military
presence at Babylon in Iraq, 2 the world has become increasingly aware of
the dangers facing cultural heritage sites. However, awareness and action
are not synonymous. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) leads the world in acting to preserve
the world‘s natural and cultural wonders through its World Heritage
program. Nevertheless, in its involvement with heritage sites around the
globe, the World Heritage program may have created a culture of
economic and political quagmires rather than cooperation and
preservation. 3 This Note will address the problematic effects of the
program and identify ways in which some of those effects can be
mitigated, thereby restoring some of the noble ideals upon which the
World Heritage program was founded.
II. BACKGROUND
A. UNESCO
UNESCO was founded as a specialized agency of the United Nations
(UN) on November 16, 1945, 4 a mere twenty-four days after the UN
1. W.L. Rathje, Why the Taliban are Destroying Buddhas, USA TODAY, Mar. 22, 2001, http://
www.usatoday.com/news/science/archaeology/2001-03-22-afghan-buddhas.htm.
2. U.S. Troops Accused of Damaging Babylon‘s Ancient Wonder, CNN.COM, July 31, 2009, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/31/iraq.babylon.damage/index.html.
3. See World Heritage at Risk, AL-AHRAM WKLY. ON-LINE, Dec. 5, 2002, http://weekly.
ahram.org.eg/2002/615/hr1.htm (Pollution, looting, war, unchecked tourism, uncontrolled urban development and natural catastrophes‘, had in many cases significantly increased threats to sites since
their inscription on the UNESCO list . . . .); see also David Harrison, Introduction: Contested
Narratives in the Domain of World Heritage, in THE POLITICS OF WORLD HERITAGE: NEGOTIATING
TOURISM AND CONSERVATION 1, 8 (David Harrison & Michael Hitchcock eds., 2005) ([A]pplications
for World Heritage Status are neither made nor received in a global vacuum . . . . [A]n international
imbalance has been recognised by the World Heritage Committee, and there is now a political imperative to . . . find more sites.); id. at 7 ([O]utcomes will depend on the balance of status and
power at any one time and on who among the numerous stakeholders . . . has the loudest voice.).
4. United Nations Educ., Scientific & Cultural Org. [hereinafter UNESCO], UNESCO: What Is It? What Does It Do?, 2, 33, UNESCO Doc. ERI/2010/WS/2 (2010), available at http://unesdoc
.unesco.org/images/0018/001887/188700e.pdf.
594 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY GLOBAL STUDIES LAW REVIEW [VOL. 10:593
Charter came into force. 5 UNESCO‘s Constitution enshrines the goals of
the organization: to contribute to peace and security by promoting
collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture in
order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the
human rights and fundamental freedoms which are affirmed . . . by the
Charter of the United Nations. 6 UNESCO‘s mission is to foster
cooperation among its Member States 7 in promotion of these goals.
8
However, more than a decade passed before UNESCO began delving into
the issues of natural and cultural preservation.
In the late 1950s, construction began on the Aswan High Dam along the
Nile River in Egypt. 9 Once constructed, the dam would create a lake that
would forever submerge hundreds of archaeological sites. 10
[T]he plight
of these [sites] captured the public imagination and appeals from the
Egyptian and Sudanese governments, among others, inspired UNESCO to
launch a campaign in 1960 to save the ancient structures. 11
5. The Charter of the United Nations came into force on October 24, 1945. See Charter of the United Nations: Introductory Note, UNITED NATIONS, http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/intro
.shtml (last visited May 16, 2011). UNESCO‘s Constitution entered into force on November 4, 1946,
after twenty countries had ratified it: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, France, Greece, India, Lebanon, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Saudi
Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States. The Organization‘s History,
UNESCO, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about-us/who-we-are/history/ (last visited Feb. 13, 2010).
6. Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, art. 1,
§ 1, Nov. 4, 1945, T.I.A.S. No. 1580, 4 U.N.T.S. 275, available at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/ 0013/001337/133729e.pdf [hereinafter UNESCO Const.]. The United Nations Charter organizes the
UN as an international body. It was signed on June 26, 1945, and came into effect on October 24,
1945. See Charter of the United Nations: Introductory Note, supra note 5. Its goals were:
[T]o practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to
unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the
acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used,
save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples[.]
U.N. Charter pmbl., available at http://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CTC/uncharter.pdf.
7. As of October 2009, UNESCO boasts 193 Member States and seven Associate Members.
Member States—Communities, UNESCO, http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=11170&URL_ DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (last updated Sept. 10, 2010).
8. UNESCO Const., supra note 6, art. 1, § 1.
9. W. Erdelen, Saving Lost Civilizations, WORLD SCI. (UNESCO/Natural Sciences Sector, Paris, Fr.), July–Sept. 2006, at 1, available at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001463/146393E
.pdf.
10. Id. These sites included Abu Simbel, a giant rock-hewn temple complex dedicated to Rameses II, one of Egypt‘s most illustrious pharaohs. Nubian Monuments from Abu Simbel to Philae,
UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE CTR., http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/88 (last visited Feb. 13, 2010).
11. Erdelen, supra note 9, at 1.
In 1959 the Egyptian and the Sudanese Governments requested UNESCO to assist their
countries in the protection and rescue of the endangered monuments and sites. In 1960, the
Director-General of UNESCO launched an appeal to the Member States for an International
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol10/iss3/5
The incredible success of the salvage and repositioning of priceless
monuments 12
ancient sites spurred UNESCO into further action. Member States began
drafting a treaty in 1969, 13
and, by 1972, UNESCO generated the
Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage (the Convention). 14
The Convention was drafted to encourage the identification,
protection and preservation of cultural and natural heritage around the
world considered to be of outstanding value to humanity. 15
To reach these
Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia. . . . Within the International Campaign,
UNESCO played the role of a coordinator and intermediary between the donor States and the Egyptian and Sudanese Governments and facilitated their efforts to save the cultural heritage
of Nubia.
Monuments of Nubia-International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia, UNESCO WORLD
HERITAGE CTR., http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/172/ (last visited Feb. 13, 2010). 12.
This appeal resulted in the excavation and recording of hundreds of sites, the recovery of
thousands of objects, and the salvage and relocation of a number of important temples to
higher ground, the most famous of them the temple complexes of Abu Simbel and Philae. The campaign ended on 10 March 1980 as a complete and spectacular success.
Id.
13. This draft treaty was called International Protection of Monuments, Groups of Buildings and
Sites of Universal Value. Francesco Francioni, The Preamble, in THE 1972 WORLD HERITAGE
CONVENTION: A COMMENTARY 11, 13 (Francesco Francioni ed., 2008). The International Union of
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) was concurrently drafting a similar treaty involving natural sites. The
two treaties were eventually combined. Id. at 13–14. 14. Id. at 15; see also Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage, Nov. 16, 1972, 27 U.S.T. 37, 1037 U.N.T.S. 151, available at http://whc.unesco.org/archive/
convention-en.pdf [hereinafter World Heritage Convention].
15. World Heritage, UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE CTR., http://whc.unesco.org/en/about/ (last
visited Feb. 13, 2010). UNESCO defines the World Heritage mission as to:
encourage countries to sign the World Heritage Convention and to ensure the protection of their natural and cultural heritage;
encourage States Parties to the Convention to nominate sites within their national
territory for inclusion on the World Heritage List;
encourage States Parties to establish management plans and set up reporting
systems on the state of conservation of their World Heritage sites;
help States Parties safeguard World Heritage properties by providing technical
assistance and professional training;
provide emergency assistance for World Heritage sites in immediate danger;
support States Parties' public awareness-building activities for World Heritage
conservation;
596 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY GLOBAL STUDIES LAW REVIEW [VOL. 10:593
goals, the Convention calls upon each Member State to do all it can to
this end, to the utmost of its own resources and, where appropriate, with
any international assistance and co-operation . . . which it may be able to
obtain. 16
And to support the States Parties, the Convention establishes the
Intergovernmental Committee for the Protection of the Cultural and
Natural Heritage of Outstanding Universal Value (the Committee). 17
One of UNESCO‘s mandates is to pay special attention to new global
threats that may affect the natural and cultural heritage and ensure that the
conservation of sites and monuments contributes to social cohesion. 18
The Committee consists of representatives from twenty-one Member
States chosen from and by the General Assembly. 19
Its responsibilities
include:
the implementation of the . . . Convention, defin[ing] the use of the
World Heritage Fund 20
and allocat[ing] financial assistance upon
encourage participation of the local population in the preservation of their cultural
and natural heritage; [and]
encourage international cooperation in the conservation of our world's cultural
and natural heritage.
Id. 16. World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, art. 4. In particular, the Convention asks for
financial, artistic, scientific and technical resources from Member States. Id. However, the
Convention also specifically says that [w]hilst fully respecting the sovereignty of the States . . . , and without prejudice to property right provided by national legislation, the States Parties to this
Convention recognize that such heritage constitutes a world heritage for whose protection it is the duty
of the international community as a whole to co-operate. Id. art. 6, ¶ 1 (emphasis added). 17. World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, arts. 7–8.
18. World Heritage, UNESCO, http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=34323&
URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (last updated Mar. 3, 2011). 19. World Heritage Convention, supra note 13, art. 8, ¶ 1. Decisions of the Committee shall be
taken by a majority of two-thirds of its members present and voting. Id. art. 13, ¶ 8.
20. The World Heritage Fund was established by the Convention and acts as a trust fund, id. art. 15, ¶¶ 1–2, drawing from:
(a) compulsory and voluntary contributions made by States Parties to this Convention,
(b) contributions, gifts or bequests which may be made by:
(i) other States;
(ii) the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, other
organizations of the United Nations system, particularly the United Nations Development Programme or other intergovernmental organizations;
(iii) public or private bodies or individuals;
(c) any interest due on the resources of the Fund;
(d) funds raised by collections and receipts from events organized for the benefit of the fund;
and
2011] HERITAGE IN PERIL 597
requests from States Parties. It has the final say on whether a
property is inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Committee
. . . examines reports on the state of conservation of inscribed
properties and asks States Parties to take action when properties are
not being properly managed. It also decides on the inscription or
deletion of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger. 21
The Convention empowers the Committee to exercise the main
collective responsibilities set forth in the Convention, 22
as enumerated
above. 23
framework of UNESCO. 24
and
Id., art. 15, ¶ 3. 21. The World Heritage Committee, UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE CTR., http://whc.unesco.org/
en/comittee/ (last visited Feb. 13, 2010). The List of World Heritage in Danger, as defined by the
Convention, consists of
property . . . for the conservation of which major operations are necessary and for which
assistance has been requested under this Convention. . . . The list may include only such
property forming part of the cultural and natural heritage as is threatened by serious and
specific dangers . . . . The Committee may at any time, in case of urgent need, make a new entry in the List of World Heritage in Danger and publicize such entry immediately.
World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, art. 11, ¶ 4.
22. Tullio Scovazzi, Articles 8–11: World Heritage Committee and World Heritage List, in THE
1972 WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION: A COMMENTARY, supra note 13, at 147, 149; see World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, art. 8, ¶ 1.
23. The Committee‘s Bureau—made up of one Chairperson, five Vice-Chairpersons, and one
Rapporteur—is in charge of organizing and delineating the work for the Committee‘s meetings. Id. at 151.
24. Id.
25. Id. at 152–53. Three Advisory Bodies serve as adjunct members of the World Heritage Committee: the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural
Property (ICCROM), the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), and the World
Conservation Union (IUCN). The Operational Guidelines of the Committee delineate the functions that the Advisory Bodies perform, which include:
(a) advise on the implementation of the World Heritage Convention in the field of their
expertise;
(b) assist the Secretariat, in the preparation of the Committee‘s documentation, the agenda of
its meetings and the implementation of the Committee‘s decisions;
(c) assist with the development and implementation of the Global Strategy for a
Representative, Balanced and Credible World Heritage List, the Global Training Strategy,
Periodic Reporting, and the strengthening of the effective use of the World Heritage Fund;
(d) monitor the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties and review requests for
International Assistance;
(e) in the case of ICOMOS and IUCN, evaluate properties nominated for inscription on the
World Heritage List and present evaluation reports to the Committee; and
(f) attend meetings of the World Heritage Committee and the Bureau in an advisory capacity.
Id. 152–53 (footnote omitted).
Washington University Open Scholarship
with cooperation from the global community, the Convention endeavors to
make [t]he World Heritage seal . . . a guarantee of preservation. 26
Other than the Committee, the defining elements of the world heritage
framework 27
are the World Heritage Fund and international assistance. 28
The potential for pecuniary aid has been significant in creating support for
the program among states. 29
The World Heritage Fund is the main avenue
for supporting the activities that are submitted to and approved by the
Committee. 30
However, it falls far short of covering the whole cost of
implementing the Convention. 31
In addition to the World Heritage Fund, assistance may be called forth
from international and national governmental and non-governmental
organizations . . . [and] private bodies and individuals. 32
Requests for
funding may be made to the Committee to secure the protection,
conservation, presentation or rehabilitation of World Heritage sites. 33
The
Committee has complete control over how the requests will be handled,
including acceptance, implementation, sources of funding, and operational
priorities. 34
C. The Committee‘s Power to Effect Preservation of Cultural and Natural
Heritage
effectiveness of the Committee and the Convention. There certainly have
26. Simon Usborne, Is UNESCO Damaging the World‘s Treasures?, THE INDEPENDENT, Apr. 29, 2009, http://independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/is-unesco-damaging-the-worlds-treasures-
1675637.html.
27. Ana Filipa Vrdoljak, Article 13: World Heritage Committee and International Assistance, in THE 1972 WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION: A COMMENTARY, supra note 13, at 219, 221.
28. Id. at 220–21. The relevant provisions are laid out in Article 13 (international assistance) and
Articles 15–16 (World Heritage Fund) of the Convention. See World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, arts. 13, 15–16.
29. Vrdoljak, supra note 27, at 220–21 (While the World Heritage List raises the profile of the
properties in the public eye, it is the possibility of financial and technical assistance which has proved an additional incentive for states to sign up to the Convention.).
30. See, e.g., id. at 238.
31. Federico Lenzerini, Articles 15–16: World Heritage Fund, in THE 1972 WORLD HERITAGE
CONVENTION: A COMMENTARY, supra note 13, at 269, 271. Even though each State Party is required
to provide funds every two years, those funds cannot constitute more than one percent of a State Party‘s payout for UNESCO‘s budget. World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, art. 16, ¶ 1. For a
discussion on the travaux préparatoires of Article 16, see Lenzerini, supra, at 273–80.
32. World Heritage Convention, supra note 14, art. 13, ¶ 7. 33. Id. art. 13, ¶ 1. Requests . . . may also be concerned with identification of cultural or natural
property . . . . Id. art. 13, ¶ 2.
34. Id. art. 13, ¶¶ 3–8.
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol10/iss3/5
2011] HERITAGE IN PERIL 599
been success stories, such as the prominent success of Abu Simbel. 35
However, it has become more and more apparent that these successes are
dwindling, replaced by bureaucratic wrangling and underhanded deals for
money and influence between the Committee and the Member States. 36
Commentators have begun to question whether UNESCO‘s position in
international preservation has diminished significantly from the gold
standard. 37
Indeed, the World Heritage program has garnered
considerably less regard in recent years, and is seen as more concerned
with economic and political influence than the stated goals of the
Convention.
At its best, the program is characterized as teetering on its once sound
foundations as its principles and priorities crumble under the weight of
bureaucracy and outside influence. The World Heritage emblem has come
to represent a grandiose marketing tool—fodder for things to see before
you die‘ coffee-table books. 38
At its worst, the program has left its
original aims in the dust in favor of materialism and pacification, and is
now incapable of protecting the world‘s truly endangered places. 39
Even
the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), an advisory
body to the Committee, believes the program is in need of radical change
if [it] is to remain an effective conservation tool. 40
Indeed, the World Heritage program is in desperate need of an
overhaul. Unfortunately, the level of entrenchment of the issues the
program faces casts serious doubt on whether there is any realistic hope
that the program can resurrect itself. The remainder of this note will focus
on these issues, specifically problems with the Committee, the structure of
the program, and implementation, using concrete examples of problems at
various World Heritage sites, and offering viable solutions to jumpstart the
reform process.
36. Usborne, supra note 26. 37. Id.
38. Id.
39. Id. 40. Press Release, Int‘l Union for Conservation of Nature, World Heritage in Danger—IUCN
(June 29, 2009), available at http://www.iucn.org/knowledge/news/events/worldheritage/all/?3451/
World-Heritage-in-Danger---IUCN. More specifically, the IUCN is concerned with the use of the List of World Heritage in Danger, which is intended to be a constructive conservation tool, but needs to
be re-established as a way to ensure and maintain credible standards for protecting the world‘s . . .
treasures. Id.
III. WORLD HERITAGE—A LAME DUCK IN A STRAITJACKET 41
In order to tackle the problems that the World Heritage program is
facing, the Convention, which attempted to create a machine for protection
and preservation of the world‘s most important natural and cultural
treasures, must begin the…