What do you think of listing ATWHS on the country pages? Would you like to be able to add your reviews already, or wait til they are officially declared? - Els
I thought it might be preferred to continue this discussion here.
"I think there is something in this, but separating the wheat from the chaff is very important or else we will just have a list of local authority press releases." - Meltwaterfalls
What comes to mind here is, we can identify imminent/very likely ATWHS nominations as compared to so-called "local authority press", but I immediately think of Busan and the US update of the Civil Rights Movement (2008) nomination expansion from 3 to 13 components
(I posted about both extensively). Yes, we can add a ATWHS for both, but is it a valuable exercise if both nominations are officially submitted 1 week from now or 1 month after we create a ATWHS page? I would find applying a universal criteria as mentioned, a challenge based on each State Party, particularly when world heritage protocols can vary so dramatically.
For example, the Korean Press posts about world heritage on a daily basis. The Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea often meets multiple times in a year about World Heritage matters. In some cases, you have to distinguish national and regional press as to what should be taken seriously! I have posted about some aspiring nominations
(via local press) a decade ago and a mature candidacy only emerged recently or never at all! Also worth noting, Korean nominations are routinely rejected by the Korean Cultural Heritage Administration, but often bounce back
(after following recommendations) with a submission that is confirmed
(example: Hoeamsa Temple Site in Yangju City). There are also political nominations that develop, but one can hardly make out how genuine is the effort, I am thinking of the DMZ proposal right now, which seemingly remains viable, but yet far from "listing".
Here are
25 Aspiring Nominations from Korea, what would be the cut off point? Moreover, it would not be difficult for me to track down another odd 5-10 more aspiring nominations!
Certain Addition: (Clearly identified as imminent addition or planned addition in the near future)- Busan, the Capital of Refugees during the Korean War
(already official, but not published on UNESCO site)- Getbol, Korean Tidal Flat (Phase II)
(final efforts being made to shore in community support in Ganghwa/Incheon area)- Modern Protestant Missionary Base
(could be years away from a formal bid, but widely considered most viable "Christian" nomination for Korea)Likely Addition: (Identified by the Gov't as a stronger candidate/symposiums planned or already held)- Port City Incheon
- Sungkyunkwan
- Sorok-do Rehabilitation Center
- Placenta Chambers of the Joseon Dynasty
(rejected on 1st attempt, but is trying again!)- Ancient Polities of the Yeongsan River Basin
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _cut off point?_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Maybe/Possible: (Little or no substantial evidence that a viable and mature candidacy is ready)- Han River Estuary Wetland
- Yongsan Base
- Ulleungdo and Dokdo
- Jeju Stone Culture
- Seongeup Folk Village in Jeju
- Korean Cretaceous Dinosaur Coast [re-nomination/expansion]
- Landscape Korean Garden
(Nujeong Culture)- Mudeungsan National Park
- Goryeo Celadon Sites [re-nomination/expansion]
- Jukmak-dong Ancient Maritime Relic
- DMZ
Unlikely/Though Not impossible: (An uphill challenge after rejection)- Maritime Fortifications: Ganghwa Island and Gimpo (Rejected by CHA)
- Goryeo Ruins of Namhan River Basin Temples in Wonju (Rejected by CHA)
- Byeokgolje and Uirimji Reservoir (Rejected by CHA)
- Catholic Relics in Chungnam Province (Rejected by CHA)
*after a new 'Christian' nomination emerged and is seen as more viable and complete, this province-focused nomination seems dead- Jeongjo Cultural Heritage: Hwaseong New Towa (Rejected by CHA)
- Traditional Landscape of Cheongsando Island in Wando (Rejected by CHA)
Another Example: Canada & the United States
Canada has a "
Sites proposed for Canada's Tentative List" page which also lists the applicant, which varies from private citizen to Parks Canada, First National Tribal Government, or Provincial Government.
How do we distinguish these ATWHS?
In the US
(as I mentioned), the
Civil Rights Movement Sites (2008) stand out as a potentially expanded nomination and quiet useful information for travel purposes.
The current nomination identifies only 3 components, all in Alabama. A symposium was just held in order to present the expanded nomination, which includes 13 components that will be submitted to the Federal Register for Public Comment shortly and then officially updated.
Civil Rights Movement Sites (serial nomination: 13 components)- Martin Luther King National Historical Park [Ebenezer Baptist Church]
- Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument [16th Street Baptist Church]
- National Historic Trail Selma To Montgomery [Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church]
- National Mall and Memorial Parks [The Lincoln Memorial]
- National Historic Trail Selma To Montgomery [Edmund Pettus Bridge]
- Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park [Monroe School]
- Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site
- National Civil Rights Museum [The Lorraine Motel]
- Bethel Baptist Church (Birmingham, AL)
- Robert Russa Moton High School (Farmville, VA)
- International Civil Rights Center & Museum [F.W. Woolworth's Building] (Greensboro, NC)
- Medgar and Myrlie Evers Home National Monument (Jackson, MS)
- Freedom Riders National Monument [Greyhound Bus Terminal and Burning Site] (Anniston, AL)
What about the
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, which was identified by the Park Service for the 2017 update as an extension to El Pinacate, but was only dropped because of the installation of a border wall (now incomplete) along the US/Mexico corridor between the parks? This decision was made only weeks before the official publication of the new 2017 Tentative List. Moreover, collaboration is ongoing between the US and Canada on 2 additional transnational properties!
