After reading parts of a 392 page dossier prepared between 2013 - 2016, with the ambition of being included on Korea's tentative list, I began reflecting on the process in which each state party approaches their tentative list.

Does anyone have any insight into the bar set by other state parties regarding inclusion onto their respective tentative list? Essentially, how mature does the nomination file need to be? OUV justification, comparative analysis, management plan, detailed maps, symposium with public measuring community support? The 392 page dossier included all of the later and more. In fact, dozens of pictures highlighted the serial components, historical maps alongside satellite images were used, and significant historical research occurred in order to form this dossier itself.

When considering the means OECD countries have at their disposal in regards to cultural heritage, tourism promotion, and preservation it begs the question: is it possible to close the gap between under-represented countries and their more affluent counterparts?

The German process is detailed here. Unfortunately, in German.

For great Britain, please find the link. It is little old, but still helpful

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved= 0ahUKEwiXxpi_pMjVAhWGqo8KHURuAK4QFgg1MAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.greenwichworldheritage. org%2Fassets%2Fugc%2Fdocs%2FReview-WH-Tentative-List-Report_March2011.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH bP8Y_NMzkzRo6TMe0I7fqoTkd1Q

Can you provide the link/ Document ?

The dossier is for the aspiring nomination, Maritime Fortifications: Ganghwa Island and Gimpo. However, I do not think I should share it publicly as its not published online, but was emailed to me directly by the stakeholders/committee leader preparing the dossier. The email explicitly states *NOTICE: Please use it only for research purposes.

More work clearly needs to be done, because additional properties in Gimpo will be included after recommendations by the Cultural Heritage Administration of Korea. The timeline at this point is unclear, but an update to Korea's tentative list in 2018 is probable.

It seems the norm with developed countries in Europe and East is that the process starts much earlier, in which the cultural heritage body screens candidates rather thoroughly. However, in Southeast Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and several Arab states final dossiers are more like first drafts. At least this is my feeling after seeing the various completeness and depth of nomination files. I am not sure this can be remedied through the Upstream process, but perhaps ICOMOS and IUCN being involved more in developing Tentative Lists will ultimately prove fruitful. We shall see!