Transcript OUV: Outstanding Universal Value ICOMOS

OUV:
Outstanding Universal
Value
ICOMOS
presentation
to the 30th Session of the World
Heritage Committee, Vilnius, 2006
• Outstanding Universal Value underpins the
whole World Heritage process:
• It is what defines and sets apart the Word
Heritage Convention from other heritage
conventions
• It allows humankind to value cultural and natural
heritage in such a way that it transcends and
crosses international boundaries
OUV
• The concept of OUV implies a shared concern for the
conservation of humanity’s heritage;
• Simple concept:
• Pass on to future generations what mankind as a whole
values
• Powerful concept-
• WH Convention in terms of numbers of ratifications,
most successful international convention
• 812 properties now inscribed on WH list
• Over 600 attendees at this meeting
OUV
• Two definitions were given us by President of Lithuania
• WHS are ‘local by their roots, national by their scope and
universal by their value’
• He also quoted Claude Levi-Strauss:
• ‘global culture implies universal interaction among
cultures preserving their unique features’.
• The participants of the Global Strategy Natural and
Cultural Expert Meeting in Amsterdam (1998)
– formulated the following definition:
• The requirement of outstanding universal value should
be interpreted as an outstanding response to issues of
universal nature common to or addressed by all human
cultures.
• In relation to natural heritage, such issues are seen in
bio-geographical diversity,
•
• In relation to culture, in human creativity and resulting
cultural processes.
Kazan themes
•
•
•
•
•
OUV is linked to values
OUV has evolved over time
OUV is applied through criteria
OUV underpins management
Corporate memory of OUV lies within WHC decisions
• Kazan Meeting put forward a series of recommendations
• Highlighted in this presentation in green
OUV
• Deciding what has OUV = choosing what society values
• Bring in value judgements
• OUV like all values is attributed by people and through
human appreciation
• Cannot make decision purely on scientific basis
• Even for natural sites some fossils valued more than
others; certain rare species above others;
• Value systems change
• Industrial heritage, 20th century architecture now valued
in a way they were not 30 years ago
• There are intrinsic differences between cultural and
natural properties
• These differences have sometimes led to the incorrect
conclusion that IUCN and ICOMOS do not have
equivalent standards in interpreting and applying the
concept of OUV.
• The underlying construction and definition of OUV is
different for cultural and natural features, and this
difference is reflected in the carefully drafted criteria for
the Convention.
• The World Heritage Committee, as early as its second
session of the Bureau in 1979, noted that universal value
was difficult to define and that even using comparative
studies it was more difficult to select cultural sites than
natural sites for inclusion in the World Heritage list.
OUV
• Concept simple: application more difficult
• What tools are used?
– Definition of OUV
– Criteria
– Thematic Studies
– Scientific studies
– Past Decisions
Tools: Criteria
• The concept of OUV is given substance by applying the
criteria set out in the Operational Guidelines;
• The criteria have changed over years
• Application of the criteria has also not been static
• The criteria have evolved and will continue to evolve to
accommodate changing perceptions and interpretations
of heritage;
• ICOMOS considers that further guidance is needed on
the application of cultural criteria
– Past uses
– Current practices
– As guidance for SPs
Tools: Scientific Studies
• For the natural world:
• Many global studies of dispositions of natural
phenomena
• For the cultural world:
• Data is mostly gathered at national level
• Few international institutions creating global databases
of cultural assets
• No maps:
– Of threatened cultural assets
– Showing global disposition of types of cultural heritage
– ICOMOS cannot contribute to furthering this data
Tools: Thematic studies
• ICOMOS acknowledges the need for more thematic
studies
• e.g. Rock Art
– ICOMOS just published first Regional Rock art study on Latin
America and Caribbean – planning more for all regions
• As tools for SPs to set sites in context
• Help with comparative analyses
• Identify resource data
• in order to achieve the effective application of the criteria
there is a need for better databases of heritage
information and thematic and comparative studies, both
regional and global;
• Need for a summary of existing thematic studies
• Accessible to SPs and their decision makers
Tools: Past decisions
•
the corpus of past decisions forms an indispensable corporate memory for
the application of OUV;
•
•
•
Past decision are corporate memory of the WH Committee
Decisions need to be more accessible – catalogue
Support comparative analyses
However:
• OUV reflects what today’s society chooses to value
•
•
OUV must be responsive to us today
Must allow concept of OUV to evolve
•
The concept of OUV in the World Heritage Convention was widely drawn to
allow for evolution over time
•
ICOMOS is working to gather data on past Committee decisions for cultural
sites
Identifying OUV
• Identification of OUV
• Kernel in all nominations
• Underpins the whole process
• Some nominations now very weighty
• Use large resources
• If fundamental OUV concept flawed, they will not be
recommended for inscription
Identifying OUV
• ICOMOS would like to see more attention
given to the identification of OUV
– Perhaps through Tentative lists
• The Committee may like to consider how
ABs might provide advice for this process
Justifying OUV
• Appreciate that many resources sometimes
applied to nominations
• Weighty dossiers do not make up for lack of
clarity in way criteria applied
• Or lack of substantial justification of the criteria
• ICOMOS considers more guidance is needed for
SPs on application of criteria
Justifying OUV
• ICOMOS preparing Guidance on
Nominations and Tentative List for SP (in
parallel with IUCN)
• Include justifying criteria, comparative
analysis etc
Sustaining OUV
• Concept of OUV underpins the management of sites
• The concept of OUV is poorly understood in general and
requires major communication efforts, both generally and
at site level
• On how many sites do stakeholders fully understand
OUV?
• Arguments and debates on OUV can become quite
academic
• Must ensure that ultimately OUV of sites is as simple
and clear as possible
Sustaining OUV
• Sustaining OUV in the long term will only happen if sites
are managed and conserved sustainably
• And if there is involvement from and benefits to local
communities and indigenous people
• ICOMOS is proposing Guidance Manual on Sustainable
Management of Sites