Address by Mr Koïchiro Matsuura, Director-General of UNESCO, on the occasion of the 33rd session of the World Heritage Committee Seville, Spain, 22 June 2009 Madam Minister of Culture, Mr President of the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, Mr Mayor of the City of Seville, Mr President of the General Conference of UNESCO, Mr Chair of the Executive Board, Madam Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, It is a great pleasure for me to be here with you for this 33rd session of the World Heritage Committee. Above all, I wish to thank the Spanish authorities for their welcome and their usual warm hospitality, this time in the beautiful city of Seville. Everyone knows that Spain has deep respect and affection for its highly diverse cultural heritage and this is shown by the holding of this meeting here, in Seville. Of the 40 Spanish sites on the World Heritage List, six are in the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, including the splendid architectural complex of the Cathedral, Alcázar and Archivo de Indias located here in Seville. In addition, I wish to recall that Seville is a member of the UNESCO Creative Cities Network having been chosen as the first UNESCO City of Music in 2006. Likewise, it is essential to mention that for more than seven centuries, Andalusia demonstrated to the world how enriching cultural diversity is through the peaceful and harmonious coexistence of three religions and peoples from very different backgrounds. DG/2009/085 Original: multilingual
Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, Almost 10 years have already passed since I first addressed this Committee as Director-General of UNESCO. It was at your meeting in Marrakech, at the end of November 1999. One year earlier, in 1998, I had the honour of chairing your meeting in Kyoto, in Japan, and since then I have followed your work with special interest. In the last decade, the achievements of the Committee, the progress made by the States Parties in protecting the world heritage and UNESCO s accomplishments in responding to the increasing number of requests from national and local authorities, site managers, research institutes, development agencies, the media and the general public have been a source of great satisfaction to me. The 177 conservation reports that are being submitted this week for your consideration illustrate the magnitude of the challenges facing the Committee as we shall see later. For the time being, allow me to share with you some considerations of a more general nature. Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, Let us begin with the global strategy. In my speech just 10 years ago, I identified the range and representativeness of the World Heritage List as a major challenge. At that time the List was made up of 582 sites in 114 out of a total of 157 States Parties. Today, there are 878 sites in 145 out of 186 States Parties, with the 187th due very shortly. This is a big improvement, although more efforts are needed to ensure that all States Parties are represented on the List. More also needs to be done to address persistent geographical imbalances and the ratio of natural to cultural properties. Where there has been definite progress is in the diversity of cultural heritage represented, so that we are now seeing more cultural landscapes, prehistoric sites, modern heritage and industrial sites. DG/2009/085 page 2
There is also greatly improved understanding of where the gaps are and a real determination to improve the situation through global action and regional capacity building and financing mechanisms that seek to support implementation of the World Heritage Convention. I am thinking here about the category 2 centres already established or planned in China, Bahrain, Brazil, Norway and Mexico, as well as the African World Heritage Fund and the nascent Pacific World Heritage Fund. Indeed, 10 years ago, I identified funding and resources for World Heritage sites in developing countries as a major challenge. Since then, we have developed a strategy for using the limited resources of the World Heritage Fund more strategically. We have also benefited from the generosity of a number of States Parties notably Australia, Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom who have supported that work. Private companies and foundations have increasingly also played an important role. The United Nations Foundation has been particularly generous in its support for our work in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and other high biodiversity sites around the world, generating over $40 million of funding through innovative partnerships with major conservation NGOs. More recently, it has become a key partner of our sustainable tourism programme. Indeed, the Committee recognized that such partnerships would be indispensable in promoting the five strategic objectives developed since the 30th anniversary of the Convention in 2002: credibility, conservation, capacity-building, communication and communities. I am sure that even in this time of financial crisis, partners will continue to cooperate in implementing the Convention. In this regard, let me take this opportunity to plea for renewed political commitment and international support for the five World Heritage sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The challenges are great but we must not lose these important sites. I have not the time to mention all the successes but I would like in particular to mention the return of the Aksum Obelisk from Italy to Ethiopia at the end of 2008. This long and complex operation was not only an extraordinary technical achievement but also a convincing demonstration of the power of dialogue and international cooperation in heritage preservation. DG/2009/085 page 3
This is certainly the case for a World Heritage site that has been the focus of special attention in view of its extraordinary significance for the main monotheistic religions and for all the peoples of the world. I am referring, of course, to Jerusalem. While the political issues surrounding this site are outside UNESCO s fields of competence, the Organization has long played a role in the conservation of the Old City as a World Heritage site. In 2003, I launched an initiative, supported by the General Conference, aimed at safeguarding the heritage of the Old City, and at facilitating exchanges between all the parties concerned. The result of this initiative is the Action Plan for Jerusalem, a guide to the conservation of the Old City offered to all partners interested in collaborating on this important task. Let me take this opportunity to thank all donors for their generous support for the Action Plan and express my hope that this will continue. In recent years, the restoration of the Mughrabi Gate has been of particular concern. You all are aware of the sensitivity and complexity of this issue. The two professional technical encounters between Israeli, Jordanian and Waqf experts organized by UNESCO in January and February 2008 showed much promise. While the follow-up meeting of experts scheduled on 12 November 2008 was regrettably postponed, I remain hopeful that the concerned parties will be able to make progress on the question of access, so that I can immediately organize a new meeting to continue discussions on the restoration of the Mughrabi Gate. I emphasize: UNESCO will leave no stone unturned in its efforts to help the parties reach consensus on this case. When I took office in 1999, the World Heritage Convention was the flagship convention in the protection and promotion of culture and cultural heritage. But its clear focus on tangible cultural and natural heritage meant that other areas were neglected in legal terms. Over the past 10 years we have developed three more conventions covering underwater and intangible heritage, as well as cultural expressions. With the addition of these, UNESCO has established a comprehensive set of legal tools for protecting all aspects of humanity s cultural diversity, underpinned by the mutually reinforcing and complementary conventions of 1972, 2003 and 2005 on World Heritage, Intangible Cultural Heritage and the Diversity of Cultural DG/2009/085 page 4
Expressions. The challenge now is to establish harmonious working relationships among them. Our host Spain actively participated in the elaboration of the new Conventions and quickly ratified them once adopted. In addition to the 40 World Heritage sites mentioned earlier, it already has two elements inscribed on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage and is preparing others for examination in the near future. This dedication to safeguarding culture extends beyond its borders. Let me take this opportunity to thank Spain for its support for World Heritage through the Spanish Funds-in-Trust. This important fund aims to enhance the implementation of the World Heritage Convention in Latin America and the Caribbean Region, Africa, the Arab States and in the Pacific Region. Much has been achieved as a direct result of Spain s generosity. Let me also congratulate the Spanish Government on the generous, visionary and practical initiative that the UNDP/Spain MDG-Achievement Fund represents. By devoting one of eight thematic windows to culture, it has positioned culture at the forefront of multilateral cooperation to attain the Millennium Development Goals. It has allowed us to develop projects for national capacity-building in the field of culture in 18 countries, worth some $95 million in total. All these are huge achievements. And yet, there is so much more to do. Ten years ago I picked out the need to protect World Heritage sites really protect them by addressing the root causes of the threats to World Heritage. We all want to see sites on the World Heritage List properly protected, and a key element is dialogue with the concerned parties to explore all options for correcting threats. There have been many notable successes, such as the removal of Angkor from the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2004, and it is always a moment for celebration when a site s state of conservation ceases to be a concern. But we have to be frank and admit that if the List is to be credible, this is not always going to be possible. In New Zealand in 2007, the Committee decided that the outstanding universal value (ouv) for which the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary in Oman had been inscribed had been irreversibly compromised and removed it from the World Heritage List. DG/2009/085 page 5
This week, it will have to decide whether the continued construction of the Waldschlossen Bridge has compromised the ouv and integrity of the world heritage cultural landscape of the Dresden Elbe Valley and if so, whether to remove it from the List. The threats to the system are also opportunities opportunities to rethink UNESCO s role. For example, a series of high-profile state of conservation cases in historic city centres in recent years gave rise to a proposal to regulate the conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape through a new international recommendation. If agreed by the General Conference, such a recommendation would complement and reinforce the existing principles and policies, confirming UNESCO s natural role as the leading forum on urban conservation. Better conservation goes hand-in-hand with increased credibility themes that were emphasized in the Committee s Budapest Declaration in 2002. Let me offer two final observations on this point. As I hinted earlier, I believe there is a need for bold steps to ensure the better and appropriate geographical and thematic balance called for by the Global Strategy. This is tied to the difficult issue of whether the World Heritage List can ever be deemed to be complete and if not how the system can assure the capacity to effectively conserve and monitor the sites. Secondly, it is fully understood that the decision about whether a site is inscribed on the World Heritage List rests with this Committee after duly considering the technical evaluation and recommendation of the Advisory Bodies. There have always been cases where the Committee decided not to follow that advice. Indeed, it happened twice during my term as Chairperson in 1998. However, there appears to have been a marked increase in the number of such cases in recent years. If this were to continue, it could raise questions about the credibility of the system. I do therefore hope that the Committee will continue to examine the technical evaluations provided by the Advisory Bodies with the utmost rigour, to be sure that the proposed site really does have the outstanding universal value and the credible management system that the Convention requires. Madam Chairperson, This is my last speech to you as Director-General, and I have used the opportunity to be quite frank both about the achievements of the World Heritage DG/2009/085 page 6
Convention, and the big challenges that remain as its 40th anniversary approaches in 2012. No doubt there are many different views represented here today, but what we all share is a commitment to this Convention, and its importance as a means of safeguarding the world s heritage for our children, our grandchildren and generations to come. I myself have devoted much of my energy over the last 10 years to this task, and in extending UNESCO s efforts to the protection and celebration of other forms of cultural diversity. I will leave UNESCO in November fully confident that you, in this Committee, working with the Secretariat, will tackle the challenges before you with wisdom and commitment, and that the protection of world heritage is safe in your hands. Thank you very much for your attention. DG/2009/085 page 7