What about making a connection of all members of World Heritage Cities? Many world heritage cities (New York, Paris, Athens, Kiev just to name a few) do not take part in this initiative (anyone knows why?), so I think this connection can add some new information about these cities.

The trouble is that there are (at the last count) 224 (!!) of them so it will be a very long Connection list.
http://www.ovpm.org/cities

I would suggest making a list of those which haven't joined as perhaps being of more interest but the definition of a "city" which includes "villages" like Beemster makes it very difficult to identify non joiners on any logical basis.
A lower size limit could be added when establishing "non joiners" but I suspect the organisation sees/positions itself as providing more value to the medium sized cities than to the largest ones anyway. i.e. those towns which perhaps don't have the in-house resources to make the "most" of their WHS status

My understanding is that it's a membership organisation which exists to join together places which are keen to 'do the right thing' by their World Heritage Site status, and to work together to share information and support. I suspect the term 'city' is elastic, so that urban WHS can, if they wish, join, although technically not 'cities'.

Beemster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beemster

As it costs cash to be a member, then it may be that some places don't feel they can afford the annual fees (strapped for cash councils are always seeking cuts, it's probably the same the world over). Non-membership possibly has more to do with bean-counting accountancy than desire of those responsible for heritage, which is frequently bottom of the funding and importance heap. It's also possible that certain WHS don't actually have the commitment and site management paperwork in place to feel as yet that they are quite up to scratch. Those that have have probably done so for sound reasons, connected with a belief in the aims of the organisation and its mission. It's possible others don't join as they disagree with certain of the aims, or don't have the management structures for their WHS which they feel could benefit. It may be that only a specific part of an urban centre is inscribed, and it's not considered a large enough part to be considered a World Heritage 'City', with specific management issues, eg the Statue of Liberty.

It's not mandatory to join, and I don't think it's altogether about making the most of WHS status, in terms of tourism (which although some places want WHS status because they see tourism benefits, is not really the heart of what World Heritage is about).


"The OWHC's Mission

An international non-profit non-governmental organization, the Organization of World Heritage Cities (OWHC) was created to assist member cities adapt and improve their management methods in relation to the specific requirements of having a site inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

In accordance with its General by Laws, the OWHC has the following goals:

contribute to implementation of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and the International Charter for the Protection of Historic Cities;

encourage, on both regional and international levels, cooperation and the exchange of information and expertise among historic cities throughout the world in close collaboration with other organizations pursuing similar goals while emphasizing action likely to support the efforts of cities located in developing countries;

in cooperation with specialized organizations, ensure better links between research undertaken by specialists or experts and the needs of local management;

Sensitize the populations to patrimonial values and their protection"

It has various ways of achieving its mission, some of which are here:

http://www.ovpm.org/index.php?module=pagesetter&func=viewpub&tid=1&pid=57&mm=1039

Paris is a member:

http://www.ovpm.org/en/france/paris

Very elastic! Beemster is the quintessential "rural" inscription. The last time I was there some 7 years ago the horizons still stretched green on all sides and the straight tree-lined roads were still quiet for crowded NL.

But the title of the organisation doesn't really matter - except that it provides some unjustified "bragging rights" to small towns suffering from folie de grandeur and does somewhat misrepresent its nature! It is also annoying in an "honesty" sense the way in which members point out their membership as if it were some additional "hard fought for" accolade. In fact it would appear that, despite the title, any cultural site can apply even if it only contains a few inhabitants. My point was that a "Connection" on this site based on a "city" NOT joining (as opposed to one containing all 224 members) would be diffiicult/impossible to identify since the potential membership population was so "elastic".

I am sure its stated objectives seem admirable - but whether it delivers is another matter. Do you know why Telford has apparently let its membership lapse - perhaps it has ben taken over by bean counters! And what specifically have Bath and Edinburgh gained? Yes there is the "good community member" aspect of helping other sites - the only mention I could find of what Bath had "done" as member was indeed to host some visitors from another WHS - but that didn't really require yet another organisation. Even the time and cash strapped WHC could surely and quite easily put together a contact list and forum for exchange of views and documents etc etc of inscribed sites. I still see the annual "jolly" and extra logo on the "city" stationary as significant incentives just by themselves!

Depsite the FOI in UK I haven't been able to find out what membership actually costs -only "open" Lativa seems to have made that information available on the web
"As an OWHC member, Riga will have to pay the annual membership fee of 2,604 US dollars, but the organisation will include information on the Latvian capital in its internet site monthly visited by some 27,000 people all over the world. Riga will also be able to take part in all the activities by the OWHC, elect and be elected to the leading positions of the organisation."
Remarkably cheap really - but perhaps rates vary by country/size of town on some Economist type "Big Mac purchasing index"?

No, I think they point it out as fact, but it's certainly the case that it means that they at least are interested and concerned enough to stump up the cash.

And it's probably the bean counters in Telford, but no doubt a call would elicit info. But it does seem to do things which the WHC isn't.

http://www.telford.gov.uk/externalfunding/erdf/live-education.html

However, I suspect with Telford the fee was funded as part of a project which was time and funding limited, re Ironbridge.

http://www.telford.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/2145FA1C-09EF-4EE5-8650-F5F98235503F/0/liveher itagesummer04web.pdf

Bath, Liverpool and Edinburgh are the only three UK WHS currently members. I think they pay ten thou dollars each per annum, but you should check before believing that to be gospel. As membership is voluntary, possibly they feel it worthwhile.

Also, have you looked to see which places use the logo? And so what? Maybe they are proud of WHS status! And how many actually attend the conferences? (Which I think are every two years.) But given how many conferences politicians attend, this one at least may have some benefit in promoting world heritage, which not all politicians seem keen on. Who knows, they may even come back with some wider understanding and appreciation of the higher ideals of humanity. http://www.ovpm.org/index.php?module=pgcalendar&func=viewpub&tid=14&pid=43

Sounds like a good thing to me.

I have no doubt if you want some accurate idea of costs, then you can inquire. I doubt it will take a FOI request, it will be in council budgets.

But no-one is forcing anyone to join, and it's not something I'm losing any sleep over. Anything on the side of heritage protection and conservation/preservation, and spreading the message, in my view is no bad thing.

Bath, however, although it does mention membership and its benefits http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/BathNES/environmentandplanning/worldheritagesite/QuickGuide 14.htm hasn't been the finest example of how to run a WHS in recent times. For all it's bluster, it's had a shock though. It's even appointed a new council funded WHS officer, oddly just before the mission visited. It's amazing how the mission seemed to concentrte minds wonderfully. But there's always the undercurrent of those who would happily see the place spoiled by glass tower blocks, progress see, and some in the council who would be quite content if pesky WHS status was removed.