The World Heritage Convention and World Heritage List in Historic Context: Denied Responsibilities and the Destruction of Archaeological Heritage

• D.C. Comer ^[1]
  1. [1] ICOMOS International Committee on Archaeological Heritage Management (ICAHM)
• Localización: Arqueología: Actas del Primer Congreso Internacional de Buenas Prácticas en Patrimonio Mundial / coord. por Alicia Castillo Mena, 2013, ISBN 978-84-695-6782-1, págs. 511-520
• Idioma: inglés
• Títulos paralelos:
  • La Convención del Patrimonio Mundial y la Lista del PatrimonioMundial en su contexto histórico: responsabilidades desatendidas y ladestrucción del Patrimonio Arqueológico
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen
  • español

    This year, 2012, marks the 40th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention, which has been signed by more countries than any other international treaty in history. Not well known is that the World Heritage Conventionwas inspired by the popularity of the United States National Park Service, the first in the world, and that it waspromoted by Richard M. Nixon, then President of the United States. The Convention was therefore shaped byideas and policies that were formed within matrix of cultural assumptions that are far from universally shared.Early on, the World Heritage List was dominated by European urban cultural sites, long great sources great revenue, but incorrectly seen then as unaffected by the hordes of tourists who visit them. This history has producedenthusiasm for inscribing sites on the World Heritage List because of perceived economic benefit and a misunderstanding of the threats posed to sites by tourism. Here we attempt to open a conversation about how to ceasethe destruction of scientific and historical values at the many World Heritage Sites where numbers of touristsexceed management capacity. Proposed is that the World Heritage Committee begin by acknowledging the “organized hypocrisy” of establishing World Heritage Sites in places where crucial aspects of state sovereignty are constantly transgressed, nonetheless allowing the international community of states, banks, and corporations todeny responsibility for potentially disastrous outcomes by appealing to an unrealistically narrow definition ofsovereignty. One possibility is that management coalitions be formed of State Parties, local, international, scientific, and scholarly institutions and individuals. There is ample basis for this in the Convention, as each coalitionwould have as its paramount goal the preservation of scientific and historic values. If this or other effectivesteps are not taken to put in place effective site management, then these values will be destroyed. It is also probable that overall site conditions will degrade and visitation will attenuate. The international community mustacknowledge the ongoing responsibility it has to sites inscribed on the World Heritage List in order to realizethe intent of the World Heritage Convention. Not doing so will also leave many States Parties open to furtherassaults on domestic sovereignty and loss of self-determination as indebtedness to international banks and dependence upon foreign aid programs increase as they pursue the chimera of economic gain from unregulated tourism.

  • English

    Este año 2012, marca el 40 aniversario de la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial, que ha sido firmada por más países que cualquier otro tratado internacional en la historia. Esta ponencia examinará los principales objetivosde la Convención, las circunstancias bajo las cuales fue desarrollada, y la historia de su aplicación. No suele conocerse que la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial se inspiró en la popularidad del primer conjunto mundialde Parques Nacionales, el de Estados Unidos, promovido por el expresidente Richard M. Nixon. El Conveniopor tanto, está enraizado fuertemente en las ideas y las políticas del Servicio de Parques Nacionales de losEstados Unidos. Examinaremos cómo esto ha influido en la formación de la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial. Laponencia también estudiará cómo la lista ha llegado a estar dominada por los sitios de Europa, y las implicacionesque esto tiene tanto para la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial como para la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial.Por último, el artículo argumenta que los objetivos fundamentales de la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial seencuentran en peligro inminente de ser eclipsados por la atención prestada a los beneficios económicos percibidosrelacionados con la inscripción en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial, y propondrá formas de superar este peligro.