These are the list of pending sites. Which sites are the most deserving? Sites in bold are ones up for inscription again in 2012. (some are highlighted twice or more depending how many times they attempted to be inscribed) Which sites have a good chance of finally being inscribed, which sites should not? I am curious to everyone's general opinion about worthwhile sites, or ones that should give up on their bid. It is intriguing that many of these sites have tried unsuccessfully numerous times, and some have been pending for many years (one example: Rio) and is once again trying in the next WHC almost 10 years later. Judging from the 2011 WHC, which included many pending sites not included in the original list of nominations received by 1 February 2011, this may also happen in 2012 with sites that are "ready" though not formally announced.

The Silver Route (2010)
Dinosaur Ichnite Sites of the Iberian Peninsula (2010)
Dura Europos (2010)
Darwins Home and Workplace: Down House and Environs (2010)
L'oeuvre architecturale et urbaine de Le Corbusier (2010)
The monasteries of Tatev and Tatevi (2010)
Maison Guiette, Populierenlaan 32, Antwerpen (2010)
Oeuvre urbaine et architecturale de Le Corbusier (2010)
Tajik National Park (2010)
Western Ghats (sub cluster nomination) (2010)
La R?serve sp?ciale de Dzanga-Sangha (2010)
Blue and John Crow Mountains National Park (2010)
Urban and Architectural Work of Le Corbusier in Chandigarh (2010)
L'oeuvre architecturale et urbaine de Le Corbusier / deux maisons du Weissenhof-Siedlung & Stuttgart (2010)
Casa Curutchet (2010)
Idrija on the Mercury Route of the Intercontinental Camino Real (2010)
San Luis Potos? on the Mercury and Silver Route of the Intercontinental Camino Real (2010)
Les sites miniers majeurs de Wallonie (2010)
Pearling and its cultural landscapes in Bahrain (2010)
Kyiv: Saint Sophia Cathedral with Related Monastic Buildings, St. Cyril's and St. Andrew's Churches, Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra (2010)
Parc National de la Pendjari (2010)
The Silver Route (2009)
Cappella degli Scrovegni (2009)
L'oeuvre architecturale et urbaine de Le Corbusier (2009)
Gold Route in Parati and its landscape (2009)
Maison Guiette, Populierenlaan 32, Antwerpen (2009)
Farms of Hälsingland, Hälsingland countryside (2009)
Ville historique de Grand Bassam (2009)
L'oeuvre architecturale et urbaine de Le Corbusier / deux maisons du Weissenhof-Siedlung & Stuttgart (2009)
Casa Curutchet (2009)
Idrija on the Mercury Route of the Intercontinental Camino Real (2009)
San Luis Potos? on the Mercury and Silver Route of the Intercontinental Camino Real (2009)
Main Building of the National Museum of Western Art (2009)
Les Couvents Franciscains du Nord-Est Br?silien (2008)
Historical Relics in Kaesong (2008)
Triple-arch Gate at Dan & Sources of the Jordan (2008)
The Spa at Luhacovice (2008)
River island of Majuli in midstream of Brahmaputra River in Assam (2008)
Cultural Landscape of Bali Province (2008)
Bregenzerwald (Bregenz Forest) (2007)
Batanes Protected landscapes and seascapes (2007)
Ba Be Lake (2007)
Ville Medicee (2007)
Heidelberg, town and castle (2007)
The Historic Centre of Sibiu and its Ensemble of Squares (2007)
Réserve de la biosphere Banco Chincorro (2007)
Dinosaur Ichnite Sites of the Iberian Peninsula (2006)
Cappella degli Scrovegni (2006)
Incallajta, the largest Inca site in the Kollasuyo (2006)
River island of Majuli in midstream of Brahmaputra River in Assam (2006)
The Great Rift Valley - migratory routes - The Hula (2006)
Hyrcanian Forest (Caspian Forest) (2006)
Heidelberg, town and castle (2005)
Fishpond Network in the Trebon Basin (2005)
Paysage culturel d'Azougui (2005)
The Sugar Mill of Engombe [Ruta de Los Ingenios] (2005)
Ecosystème et paysage culturel pygmée du massif de Minkébé (2005)
The Ipolytartn?c Fossils (2004)
Hawar Islands Reserve (2004)
Kuressaare Fortress (2004)
Bosque petrificado de Puyango (2003)
Rani-ki-Vav (The Queens Stepwell) at Patan, Gujarat (2003)
City of Charlestown (2003)
Rio de Janeiro Cultural Landscape (2003)
Parque Nacional del Este (2003)
Ras Mohammed (2003)
The Bolgar historical-architectural complex (2000)

Hi winterkjm.
An interesting list that must have taken a lot of effort to compile! Many I remember and are listed on the T List history on this site but some I haven't been able to link to the date given.
The UNESCO documentation is difficult to access but I particularly looked at the nominations for 2003 (Paris) which contained some (to me!) "surprises" and have been unable to find references to the following having been considered that year
Rani-ki-kav (India)
City of Charlestown (St Kitts)
Puyango (Ecuador)

Could you help out please and indicate the sources you used for them? Ras Mohammed (Egy) Parque Nat del Este (Dom Rep) , and Rio (Bra) were all there.

Thanks

It is evident the number of pending sites increases with the years. Is this because many of the sites got nominated in the meanwhile, because they were given up by the state parties or because the percent of successful nominations per year decreased?
What about earlier pending sites? Is there a limitation as to how long a site may be pending before it is brought again in front of the committee?

Sorry to disappoint, but everything I got was from this site, which was located on the list of pending sites page. (copy/paste) If anything is inaccurate or perhaps new, it would be more useful asking Els.

Since the inscription of multiple pending sites this year, I thought it worthwhile to analyze some of these sites that could suddenly apprear in 2012 or later on.

http://www.worldheritagesite.org/pending.php

It seems The monasteries of Tatev and Tatevi have been pending since 1978 so apparently there are no limits as the pending time.

OK Els where did we get

for 2003 from? They aren't listed in the "Nomination histories" of the respective T LIst pages and I can't find them in the papers for 2003!
I homed in on them because I have become quite interested in "Step Wells" following this year's trip to India and was surprised to find that Rani-ki-kav had been nominated back in 2003!


I don't think that there is officially such a concept as "Pending" (though such a list is of course of interest to us in order show which sites at least got a far as getting nominated and not rejected - but should "Withdrawn" not also be included in our definition of "Pending"?) except in so far as a site has been REferred. The Operational Guidelines state "A referred nomination which is not presented to the Committee within three years of the original Committee decision will be considered as a new nomination when it is resubmitted for examination".
DEferred nominations can take as long as it takes to come back in and as far as I can see gain no benefit from having previously been deferred. Only "REferrals" avoid the need to have another AB "visit" so deferrals are treated just as any other "new" nomination

The only other benefit from having been previously de/referred arises from a recommendation at this year's WHC and applies solely to Committee members - "Recommends Committee members consider refraining from bringing forward new nominations that might be discussed during their term serving on the Committee, without prejudice to nomination files already submitted, deferred or referred during previous Committee sessions"

On which subject - Another "minor" administrative "Decision" made towards the end of this year's WHC which might have passed unnoticed was for the WH Centre and AB's to "Assess the advantages and disadvantages of merging the referral and deferral options for consideration of a nomination into a single mechanism".
A large amount of time was spent during this year's WHC arguing over whether some sites should be REferred or DEferred (even to the extent of having secret ballots!!)- and there were were widely differnt views over the pros/cons of each to the State Party. Indeed ther was a view that it was often a downside for the State Party NOT to have a further AB visit

The list probably is wrong here. Possibly this has to do again with (a) the strange numbering of the T sites by Unesco, and (b) my not too great solution how to distinguish T sites from inscribed sites.

I have to have a look at the code of the page for that.

I don't think that Tatev and Tatevi were actually nominated in 2010 ( see http://whc.unesco.org/document/103439 ) nor were they deferred in 1978 etc. The USSR didn't accede to the Convention until 12 October 1988 and its first nominated site was Red Square which was submitted a year later on 24 Oct 1989 and inscribed at Banff in 1990. In 1978 Armenia was a Soviet Republic within the USSR and Tatev etc would have first been put on its own T List as an independent country as late as 1995.

So it looks as if the Tatev etc has "picked up" incorrect data as to its nomination history in the same way as Rani-ki-kav etc. The "pattern" of deferral in consecutive years from 1978 to 1981 is a complete "replica" of that for Ethiopia's sites (now not on its T List) at Yeha, Melka Kontoure, Matar and Adulis. Could the data from one of them have been picked up by mistake because of the "site numbering problem"?

Also - I may be wrong, but was "Blue and John Crow Mountains" nominated for 2010? I thought that its first appearance was this year (2011). I think this "set" of "Pending" needs reviewing but possibly better to await the current known problems to be corrected.

Batanes still needs to push through with the bid. No need to mention the proof of its OUV (ICOMOS already noted its potential); the challenges of inscription simply lie in the technicalities - lessen criteria to have a more focused argument and include all ten islands of the province for a more holistic description of the landscape.

I also want to take advantage of sharing the "special" situation of cultural landscapes in the Philippines. (Already, there are forums dedicated to vineyards and African CLs)

I came across this report:
http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/html/PA-protected-landscape-approach/PartII-section7.ht ml
expressing the difficult challenges in preserving continuing cultural landscapes. In a nutshell, the report noted two important aspects: 1) community participation; 2) preservation of both tangible and intangible heritage.

Where does one find the balance between progress and tradition? When I visited the Batad rice terraces (one of the cultural landscapes), I was told that the most Ifugaos converted to Catholicism and I found out this new religion forbids performance of the past Ifugao rice rituals. The younger ones no longer learn the practices of terrace preservation and rice planting. Batanes, on the other hand, is threatened by a new type of building that will significantly alter the unique landscape of the villages.

If time cannot be stopped, there must be a way to offer the benefits of progress and development without completely turning our backs to the past.

Any insights?

Hi bojboj,
I had a look at the "Rice rituals" (e.g http://www.heirloomrice.com/index.php?p=project&n=rituals ). Interesting. There are a lot of other Web sites on the subject too but none of the mentioned the Catholic "prescription" as a factor in the decline and i wonder whether it is likely to be a major reason. Is it not more likely that, if the Gods who the ceremonies are supposed to propitiate are no longer believed in, then the major impetus for carrying out the ceremonies also disappears leaving only a "folk" memory and community cohesion as drivers for doing so.

But disappearance of the ceremonies surely isn't the main factor as to why maintenance of the terraces has declined. The prime motivation for keeping the terraces must be economic - a few could be kept as "historic" relics paid for by the state as a memento of a past culture but the bulk of terraces must stand or fall (literally) on their economic justification - either in terms of Rice cultivation or in terms of Tourism (or a mixture of each). I can find no mention in the UNESCO documentation of size of the inscribed area but the total area of terraces stretches over many thousands of sq kms and even the 4 clusters chosen for inscription aren't small as I remember them when I was there (It was difficult to discover exactly which areas were inscribed). I fear that inexorable economic and cultural change must mean that, if rice growing isn't a viable way of life compared with the alternatives available, then it must decline - and with it the infrastructure which it supported.

As I understand it Japan has kept its "small farm" rice cultivation going via government rules restricting rice imports, subsidies for the farmers and a "cultural" preference by the Japanese people for "their" rice. Are there no such factors operating in the Philippines?
Is rice growing not an economically viable way of life - if not, why not?

This article talks of "democratisation of Ifugao tourism" ( http://www.ecotonline.org/publications-/archives-/doc_download/168-philippines-ifugao riceterraces ). Necessary no doubt to preserve at least some terraces - but how many terraces can be maintained by tourism-generated income? Relatively few I would think.