hi! i'm new in this forum, although i have closely followed the works of the world heritage committee for the last 10 years (and have frequently visited this page). and although the 2008 session has just concluded, a partial list of site to be examined in 2009 is already available, check this out: http://cms.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_work/wcpa_worldheritage/wcpa_no mination/wcpa_actnomination/index.cfm

when i viewed this list, it was actually a bit of a letdown... few sites up for nomination, and mostly from europe... i have not yet seen the full list of cultural properties up for nomination but here are some of my comments:
1. no mexican natural site is up for nomination this time (at least no new site), maybe they'll reactivate a deferred one?
2. china is nominating a mixed site, unlike in previous years... now, part of the nomination procedure is that state parties are allowed to nominate two sites, provided that at least one is natural/mixed. so china will likely enter the hani terraces as its cultural nomination for 2009, and mt wutai as its mixed. but what happens if icomos/iucn does not recommend the natural part of a mixed site? will the committee allow two cultural sites to be inscribed, after all, one was initially nominated as mixed? if such is allowed, then there is a loop hole in the nomination process which countries might exploit...
3. for the second year, france is nominating a natural property from an overseas territory... and likely, the cultural nomination will come from the mainland... are we seeing a trend here? does this mean that it will take a while for nan madol to get nominated, after all, france has had some difficulties nominating natural sites from the mainland in recent years, so it might stick to the formula mainland cultural-overseas natural nomination pairing...
4. russia is one of the major world heritage countries (those with high numbers recognized on the list) that has been not successful in getting its sites recognized in recent years (i mean most of these major countries almost always have sites inscribed every year)... hope this time it will be...
5. what happened to the african natural sites? african countries have increasingly nominated cultural properties... this is probably from the increased recognition of the african cultural landscapes... the last natural inscription was madagascar's in 2007, and before that were a series of sites from south africa...
6. sites that are likely to be inscribed in 2009: the dolomites will likely be successful, after all, during the previous deferral, the committee has already pointed out the things and subjects they need to improve and focus on; wadden sea might also be up there; i don't know how valuable the korean dinosaur site is, but if the standards of nomination and presentation is similar to the one used in the jeju island nomination, then it might merit the world heritage status, then again, we might need to find out the committee and iucn's comments for bolivia's cal orcko nomination to fully assess the korean's chances; china, because it is china, might also be successful, probably, as a sacred mountain, it will qualify culturally, and provided that the natural part is extensively backed, then it might, since china has been successful in such nominations in the past few years...

Thanks a lot for sharing this, m_m!

My hopes are on The Wadden Sea and on Brazil's Paraty/Parati.

I wonder how many more mountains China plans to nominate! Some are named as sacred mountains and others national parks, but they are usually a mixture of both.

Now that the dust is settling from the 2008 inscriptions we must return to our "Top 50 missing list" - noticeably we have included NO Natural sites at the moment! So, although as m_m says, the 2009 Natural list is a "bit of a let down" we haven't exactly identified lots of good candidates either! Perhaps we aren't knowledgeable enough about these or feel that the world's great sites are already there - I feel that at least part of Svalbard should be on and will get round to "nominating" it soon!

Could Els remove Socotra from our "Top 50 missing" scoring now that it has been inscribed?

I can't find a list for possible 2009 cultural sites on the ICOMOS Web site similar to that identified for IUCN for natural sites by m_m. You obviously have some indication that Parati will be up for consideration Els. Any others (beyond those deferred/referred this year of course)?

Paraty is mentioned as a cultural landscape in the quoted document. I have no knowledge of other sites, but am looking hard for them!

P.S.: Socotra has been deleted from the Top 50 missing now

Sorry - I hadn't scrolled down far enough on the document - and it never occurred to me that Parati MIGHT be a cultural landscape! We have both been there Els - what do you think? I wonder if it is thought that "Cultural Landscapes" get treated a bit more leniently and are a bit more "fashionable"? I am not sure that recent experience would support that view (whatever happened to Bali and Buenos Aires?). And both IUCN AND ICOMOS have to be satisfied. There are a lot of Colonial Towns on the list so Brazil might have felt that it needed something "extra" and hence brought in the "Gold Route" concept!

I would think that Parati is 'just' a pretty little colonial town

I am really wondering why Bali was left out this year.

I suggested some natural sites for the missing 50 but they weren't backed :(

The Dead Sea (cross boundary: Israel-Jordan-Palestinian Authority), The erosion Cirques of the Negev and Sinai (cross boundary: Israel-Egypt) and the mixed site of Chernobyl.
I herewith present them again reinforced...

I back Solivagant's Svalbard suggestion!

What about the Sahara? Are there any natural WHS there?

I have read that the US is going to rejoin the nomination process next year and will probably start out with Mount Vernon and the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (mixed site).

Mount Vernon etc. (as the first of the new American tentative sites) is in line for 2010 I think: according to this article and this one

actually, there are. but the sites are more on the periphery... algeria's tassili n'ajjer is a mixed site, and niger's air and tenere reserve is a natural site... there is a rock art site in libya too.

Shouldn't we make a Sahara connection then? Els?

Done!

With help from my friend, here the list of nomination site in 2009

- Ribeira Grande, Cape Verde
- Grand-Bassam, Cote d'Ivorie
- Mount Wutai, China
- Mount Songshan, China
- Shushtar, Iran
- Harappa (extension of Moenjodaro), Pakistan
- Tubbahata extension, Philippines
- Royal Tombs of the Joseon Dynasty, South Korea
- Dinosaur Coast, South Korea
- Seruwila Mangala Raja Maha Viharaya (extension of Kandy), Sri Lanka
- Graz extension, Austria
- St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk, Belarus
- Palais Stoclet, Belgium
- Jajce, Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Lonjsko Polje Nature Park, Croatia
- Mikulcice, Czech/Slovak
- Piton of Reunion, France
- Arc et Senan extension, France
- Works of Le Corbusier, France Germany Japan Argentina Belgium Switzerland
- Swetzingen, Germany
- Wadden Sea, Germany/Netherlands
- Galilee, Israel
- Langobardorum, Italy
- Dolomites, Italy
- Orheiul Vechi, Moldavia
- Sucevita (extension of Moldavian churches), Romania
- Lena Pillars Nature Park, Russia
- Levoca (extension of Spissky Harad), Slovakia
- Mercury and Silver Route, Spain Mexico Slovenia
- Torre de Hércules, Spain
- Farms and Villages in Hälsingland, Sweden
- La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland
- Pontcysyllte, UK
- Paraty Gold Route, Brazil
- Caral-Supe, Peru

Crikey, good work.

I am very happy to see Palais Stoclet in this group, it is under threat of its contents being sold off, so hopefully this will be a barrier to that happening.
Also good to see confirmation of the Le Corbusier nomination, although does it not include Chandigarh?