1.Front section - IUCN

Contribution of the World Heritage Convention to building support for the global protected area system 13
through the WH Convention will hopefully encourage
wider application.
Another uncommon and often overlooked aspect of
heritage that has gained acceptance through WH is
the recognition of geo-physical, geomorphological
and fossil sites. A total of 46 WH sites have been
inscribed for these values, which has led to greater
prominence of geological features as part of a nation’s
heritage. It has led to a proposal to establish a
“Geoparks” initiative which would provide
international recognition to the large number of sites
that deserve protection for “geodiversity” reasons.
In addition to expanding the approach to
considering what comprises “heritage”, WH has been
a leader in designing new concepts and approaches
to management. For instance, WH has been active in
fostering the concept of serial sites – the linking of a
network of related places within and between
countries. This has been a parallel development with
“cluster sites” as promoted by UNESCO’s MAB
programme. The first of these (1988) was the Central
Eastern Rainforest Reserves of Australia which set a
benchmark for establishing a management framework
over a widely dispersed series of remnant forests.
Experience gained here was subsequently used as a
model for protection of other forests along Brazil’s
Atlantic coast, Madagascar’s wet forests, the boreal
forests of Fennoscandia, the sacred forests of Cote
d’Ivoire and the marine reserve network of the Belize
Barrier Reef. Perhaps the boldest attempt at a serial
site is the current project to prepare a nomination of
20 isolated atolls and islands belonging to six
countries in the Central Pacific (WH Centre, 2003).
All the above efforts complement the linkage and
network initiatives proposed by conservation biology
planners.
WH has been particularly active in addressing the
difficult issue of mining and protected areas.
Spurred by threats from mining activities to the WH
sites of Lorentz in Indonesia, Kamchatka Volcanoes in
Russia, Kahuzi-Biega and Okapi Wildlife Reserve in
the DRC, Huascaran in Peru, Kakadu in Australia and
others, the WH Committee established a working
group which engaged the International Council on
Metals and the Environment (ICME) to study the
issue. Subsequent workshops led to a set of principles
intended to guide mining activities in and adjacent to
protected areas. This eventually led to a position
statement on mining and protected areas endorsed by
the IUCN Council in April 1999. In 2003, the
members of the mining industries belonging to the
ICME announced an agreement that they would not
undertake mining activities in WH sites. By setting
standards for mining and energy extraction near WH
sites, and opening a partnership with the mining
industry, new ground in this contentious area has been
forged.
An even more complex and intractable issue for
some protected areas has been what actions to take
in times of civil unrest, warfare and political
turmoil. The situation in the DRC which has seriously
affected five WH sites there (Debonnet and Hillman-
Smith, 2003) as well as other lesser known conflicts in
India’s Manas WH site (Anon, 2003) and the Comoe
WH site in Cote d’Ivoire (Fischer, 2003) were the
subject of case studies at the World Parks Congress in
2003. Although normal management activities cannot
be conducted under these conditions, some effective
use of the WH label has been used to open dialogue
with the military and rebel groups. Equipment and
funds for training and monitoring have been provided
in all cases. Crisis management and conflict resolution
skills have been strengthened which will prove
important in the recovery phase. Again, experience
gained on some of the innovative approaches used by
WH in crisis situations is of broader use for
conservation agencies.
Finally, as suggested by Phillips (2003), the WH
experience can be adapted to apply to other
international conservation regimes such as Biosphere
Reserves, Ramsar and regional agreements such as
ASEAN Heritage sites. These lessons would include
the value of having independent advisory bodies, the
monitoring system that allows a measure of
accountability and the opportunities for peacebuilding
across international boundaries. With the
recent Memorandum of Understanding with the
Convention on Biological Diversity referred to above,
a closer relationship with this powerful conservation
instrument will also lead to stronger “benefits beyond
WH boundaries”.
175