"Ensuring lasting protection against destruction and deterioration for the

tangible and intangible cultural heritage of humanity "

Working paper for the preparatory meeting in Geneva on October 19, 2015 of the IPU General Assembly (Lusaka, March 2016)

Alain DESTEXHE

Latest version 29/09

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I) WHAT IS HERITAGE?

II) IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES

2.1) Mass tourism

2.2) Armed conflicts and terrorism

2.3) Looting and illicit trafficking

2.4) Population growth and urbanisation

2.5) Lack of awareness

2.6) Restoration

2.7) Globalisation

2.8) Climate change

2.9) Lack of or insufficient registration by some countries

III) CONCLUSION

IV) ONE GOAL...AND PROPOSALS

Latest version 29/09

3

I) What is heritage? Many Conventions define its scope:

A) 1954: Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict - The Hague - (Completed with First Protocol: 1954, and the Second Protocol: 1999);

Definition Here, cultural goods are defined as (The Hague Convention, Article 1): a. The movable or immovable property of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people, such as monuments of architecture, art or history, whether religious or secular; archaeological sites; groups of buildings which, as such, are of historical or artistic interest; works of art,

manuscripts, books and other objects of artistic, historic or archaeological value, as well as scientific collections and important collections of books or

archives or reproductions of the property defined above;

b. b. Buildings whose main and effective purpose is to preserve or exhibit the movable cultural property defined in subparagraph a, such as

museums, large libraries and depositories of archives, and refuges intended to shelter, in armed conflict, the movable cultural property defined in

subparagraph a.;

c. Centres containing a large amount of cultural property as defined in paragraphs a. and b., known as "centres containing monuments". Contents and features This Convention stemmed from the massive destruction of heritage during the Second World War. The main objective is therefore to establish a series of measures ensuring that heritage is spared as much as possible during armed conflicts by implementing safeguard measures in time of peace, promoting mutual respect of cultural property during armed conflicts, setting up shelters to protect property, creating special units assigned to preserving heritage in times of war, etc. Bodies Committee established by the Second Protocol. It has 12 States Parties for a period of 4 years. There is also a Committee Bureau that is renewed annually. Belgium has belonged to the Committee of the 2nd Protocol of the Committee since 2011 and presided it during the 2012 and 2013 sessions.

I) ELEMENTS OF DEFINITION

Latest version 29/09

4

B) 1970: Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, Paris;

Definition (Article 1) For the purposes of this Convention, the term `cultural property' means property which, on religious or secular grounds, is specifically designated by each State as being of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science and which belongs to the following categories:

(a) rare collections and specimens of fauna, flora, minerals and anatomy, and objects of palaeontological interest;

(b) property relating to history, including the history of science and technology and military and social history, to the life of national leaders,

thinkers, scientists and artists and to events of national importance;

(c) products of archaeological excavations (including regular and clandestine) or of archaeological discoveries;

(d) elements of dismembered artistic or historical monuments and archaeological sites;

(e) antiquities more than one hundred years old, such as inscriptions, coins and engraved seals;

(f) objects of ethnological interest;

(g) property of artistic interest, such as: (i) pictures, paintings and drawings produced entirely by hand in any medium and in any material (excluding industrial designs and manufactured

articles decorated by hand);

(ii) original works of statuary art and sculpture in any material;

(iii) original engravings, prints and lithographs; (iv) original artistic assemblages and montages in any material;

(h) rare manuscripts and incunabula, old books, documents and publications of special interest (historical, artistic, scientific, literary, etc.) singly or

in collections;

(i) postage, revenue and similar stamps, singly or in collections;

(j) archives, including sound archives, photographic and cinematographic;

(k) articles of furniture more than one hundred years old and old musical instruments. Contents and features In the years 1960-1970, many acts of theft were acknowledged, as well as important works being increasingly marketed from illegal sources. The text of the Convention calls for many preventive measures in order to prevent this, such as carrying out inventories or information campaigns. Similarly, signatory States commit to take all necessary measures in order to return stolen cultural property to their original States. This Convention is based on the principle of cooperation between States. The Convention was ratified by 129 Member States of UNESCO. Bodies The Unit for the 1970 Convention is the Convention Secretariat. There is also an Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation.

C) 1972: Convention concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage - Paris;

Latest version 29/09

5

190 countries – 962 sites including 745 cultural, 188 natural and 29 mixed in 152 States Parties

Definition (Article 1) Article 1

For the purposes of this Convention, the following shall be considered as "cultural heritage":

Monuments: architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave

dwellings and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science;

Groups of buildings: groups of separate or connected buildings, which, because of their architecture, their homogeneity or their place in the

landscape, are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science;

Sites: works of man or the combined works of man and nature, and areas including archaeological sites which are of outstanding universal value

from the historical, aesthetic, ethnological or anthropological points of view.

Article 2

For the purposes of this Convention, the following shall be considered as "natural heritage":

Natural features consisting of physical and biological formations or groups of such formations, which are of outstanding universal value from the

aesthetic or scientific point of view,

Geological and physiographical formations and precisely delineated areas which constitute the habitat of threatened animal and plant species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation,

Natural sites or precisely delineated natural areas of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty. Contents and features The criteria for a site to be registered on the World Heritage List are defined in the Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention (10 criteria).1 There is also a List of World Heritage in Danger which includes sites (1) in "ascertained danger", when faced with specific and proven imminent danger or (2) in "potential danger", when faced with threats which could have deleterious effects on their value as World Heritage. The aim is to allow the UNESCO Committee to allocate immediate assistance from the World Heritage Fund to the endangered property. The most covered category in this list is that of cultural property with religious connotations. Bodies:

- The World Heritage Committee (meets once a year, representing 21 States Parties to the Convention, in charge of implementing the Convention) Currently, the 21 States include: Algeria, Colombia, Croatia, Finland, Germany, India, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Serbia, Turkey, Viet Nam - The General Assembly (meets during the sessions of the General Conference of UNESCO, determines States' contributions to the World Heritage Fund and elects Committee members)

1 http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/

Latest version 29/09

6

D) 2001: Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage; Paris

Definition (Article 1) 1. (a) The term "underwater cultural heritage" means all traces of human existence having a cultural, historical or archaeological character which have submerged, partially or completely, periodically or continuously, for at least 100 years, including:

(i) sites, structures, buildings, artefacts and human remains, together with their archaeological and natural context;

(ii) vessels, aircraft, other vehicles or any part thereof, their cargo or other contents, together with their archaeological and natural context; and

(iii) objects of prehistoric character.

(b) Pipelines and cables placed on the seabed shall not be considered as underwater cultural heritage.

(c) Installations other than pipelines and cables, placed on the seabed and still in use, shall not be considered part of the underwater cultural

heritage. Contents and features The stated objective of this Convention is adequate protection by States Parties of their underwater heritage. It sets out the basic principles, defines the relevant principles of cooperation, as well as practical rules for research in this area. The preservation of underwater heritage becomes mandatory, with an emphasis on in situ preservation and intervention. The Convention also aims to fight against the commercial exploitation of heritage and invites States to share their information on the underwater area. Bodies A Conference of States Parties is organised at least every two years by the Director General of UNESCO.

E) 2003: Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage - Paris

The recognition of intangible heritage has been a long process: 1989: UNESCO Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore 2001: UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity 2002: Istanbul Declaration 2003: Aforementioned Convention (163 states divided into six groups according to their geographical location)

Definition For the purposes of this Convention,

1. The "intangible cultural heritage" means the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills - as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith - that communities, groups and, where appropriate, individuals recognize as part of their cultural

heritage. This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response

to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them a sense of identity and continuity, helping thus promoting

respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. For the purposes of this Convention, consideration will be given solely to such intangible cultural heritage consistent as is compatible with existing international human rights instruments, as well as the requirements of mutual respect among

communities, groups and individuals, and of sustainable development.

2. The "intangible cultural heritage", as defined in paragraph 1 above, is manifested inter alia in the following domains:

(a) oral traditions and expressions, including language as a vehicle of intangible cultural heritage;

(b) performing arts;

Latest version 29/09

7

(c) social practices, rituals and festive events;

(d) knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe;

(e) traditional craftsmanship. Contents and features Tangible and intangible cultural heritage are sometimes entwined: intangible heritage may be associated with instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces. Caution: the community itself, rather than the State, has to choose to participate and support conservation initiatives of its intangible heritage. Nonetheless, a set of operational guidelines encourage the State to set up a coordination mechanism allowing experts to participate in the identification of this heritage (under Article 11 of the Convention). One must also respect the fact that some parts of the heritage may remain secret. Characteristics:

(1) Traditional, contemporary and living (ever-changing); (2) Inclusive (transmitted from generation to generation, a source of identity for the

community); (3) Representative (it must always be shared to renew itself); (4) Based on communities (they themselves decide what is part of their heritage,

since they create it). Benefits of preserving: many traditional or indigenous knowledge can be integrated into health policy, education and the management of natural resources. Moreover, according to Chiara Bortolotto2, taking this heritage into consideration implies:

(1) the culmination of the consideration of folklore and living cultures, long neglected in favour of major monuments;

(2) UNESCO striving for heritage not to be solely considered according to a Western conception of heritage.

States should draw up periodic reports to assess their implementation of the Convention: before December 15 of the 6th year of ratification. There is also an Urgent Safeguarding List, which requires States to report every four years.

2 « Le trouble du patrimoine culturel immatériel », Chiara Bortoletto, Terrain, published online on November 15,

2011. URL : http://terrain.revues.org/14447 ;

Latest version 29/09

8

Note also the "Living Human Treasures" initiative: these are people chosen by States to transmit traditional knowledge.

Bodies:

- The General Assembly of States Parties (meets every two years); - The Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (rotation of Member States elected for four years then responsible for appointing qualified people in this area).

FYI, Belgium has been a Committee member since 2012, and will be until 2016 (along with Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Brazil, Peru, Saint Lucia, Uruguay, Afghanistan, India, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Korea, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Namibia, Nigeria, Uganda, Algeria, Egypt, Tunisia) – However, this list will be amended at the next General Assembly in November 2016.

In conclusion, as we can see, the notion of Heritage is an abstract one. The definitions are additive and complementary. None is sufficient in itself. While the focus here is on the various Conventions of UNESCO, there are other reference texts that ensure the preservation of Heritage. Since the goal here is to have the most comprehensive vision possible, we have chosen to focus on Conventions under the auspices of UNESCO but it is important to keep in mind that other institutions have an important role to play at international, European and national levels, and play a key supporting role.

2.1) MASS TOURISM Challenge: The World Heritage is subject to global consumption, which leads to question the sustainability of tourist flows.

Theory

II) IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES

Latest version 29/09

9

According to research by Benhamou, inscription on the World Heritage List involves the site largely opening to international tourism. For economic reasons, this is promoted by public authorities and private companies and can be very disrespectful. Tourism, once promising, thus becomes destructive. A striking example is Jacques Duhamel, in France, who said in 1978 that "heritage is a manageable and exploitable fossil wealth just like oil." For Françoise Benhamou3 "this crusade for the mercantile consumption of heritage is on not only damaging for visitors, who are deceived about the nature of the good up for consumption as well as placed in conditions of crowding and noise which are unsuitable anyway for any intellectual or aesthetic enjoyment." At the end of the day, the inscription on the lists is more driven by the touristic image it provides than by the protection and enhancement of the sites.4 Yet, promoting tourism often harms conservation due to the increased attendance of sites (Kerr). Tourist services multiply around the sites, affecting their spirit and authenticity. According to Evans, Firat and Dholakia, this "touristification" turns traditional cultural practices into a cultural offer for tourists in search of new experiences. Moreover, according to Venon, "tourists are looking more for 'atmosphere' than for knowledge". It is thus oftentimes more about "enjoying the scenery" than learning more about its historical context.5 Partnerships between The Heritage Centre and the tourism industry are also unfortunate. This includes the World Heritage Tourism Program, dedicated to World Heritage sites. On top of providing tools for tourism development, this program has enabled World Heritage sites to be represented in the Berlin International Travel Bourse. There is also a partnership with the publisher "Our Place" for a series of books Places of Wonder and Discovery showcasing photographs of World Heritage sites. In 2009, UNESCO even partnered with Trip Advisor to allow its twenty million monthly visitors to learn more about World Heritage sites. Obviously the positive economic impact and development potential cannot be denied for certain regions. In response to the acknowledged effects of mass tourism, the notions of cultural tourism and sustainable tourism are promoted. In 2012, the World Heritage Committee adopted a program on sustainable tourism.

Examples of sites directly threatened by tourism:

3 Benhamou Françoise, « L'inscription au patrimoine mondial de l'humanité. La force d'un langage à l'appui d'une

promesse de développement», Revue Tiers Monde 2/2010 (n° 202), 113-130 4 Saskia Cousin, « L’Unesco et la doctrine du tourisme culturel », Civilisations, 57 | 2008, 41-56.

5 Pascale Marcotte, Laurent Bourdeau, « La promotion des sites du Patrimoine mondial de l'UNESCO :

Compatible avec le développement durable ? », Management & Avenir 2010/4 (n° 34), 270-288

Latest version 29/09

10

Angkor: In the first five months of 2015 alone, no less than 970,361 visitors went to Angkor Archaeological Park. "Nobody should be allowed to walk over one-thousand-year-old stones," said Jeff Morgan, Executive Director of the World Heritage Fund.6 The excessive walking as well as the traffic fumes (tourist coaches) affect the site. The number of tourists has risen from 60,000 in 1999 to 250,000 in 2001, to 2.5 million in 2011, to 7 million in 2015. Machu Picchu: Since 2008, roughly 2,500 people have been visiting the site every day. "Can you imagine all those people walking on the farming terraces?", laments a historian.7 A big threat is that a new international airport announced for 2018 between Cuzco and Machu Picchu will allow tourists to avoid Lima. Authorities are aiming for more than 5 million passengers in 2025 compared to the current 2 million, keeping in mind that 70% of travellers come to see Machu Picchu. The Sistine Chapel: 15,000 to 20,000 tourists visit it every day – 4.5 million a year. "Humans breathe and sweat, and dust and moisture endanger the frescoes," says the director of the Vatican Museums.8 Indeed, the Sistine Chapel is only 40.5 meters long by 14 meters wide. Egyptian tombs: In the Valley of the Kings in Egypt, the tombs of Nefertiti, Tutankhamen or Seti among others are affected by humidity due to the number of daily visitors. At a rate of an average 2.8 grams of perspiration per visitor, it has been understandably necessary, though unfortunate for tourists, to close the tombs of Nefertiti and Seti. Mount Everest: In the mid-2000s, a cleaning operation removed 2.4 tonnes of waste there. In the valley, there are heaps of waste left by expeditions. Between 1953 and 1990, it is thought that no less than 50 tonnes of plastic, glass and metal were left there. Mountain guide Yann Delevaux says: "It's not just lovers of nature that come to Everest Base Camp." 9 The gorillas of Virunga Park (Rwanda): Note that some countries have taken unilateral measures to combine tourism and conservation. Thus, foreign visitors must pay an amount of $750 and Rwandans $50.

Recommendations:

6 http://www.lapresse.ca/voyage/destinations/asie/cambodge/201107/20/01-4419383-les-temples-dangkor-

menaces-par-le-tourisme-et-la-pollution.php 7 http://www.lemonde.fr/ameriques/article/2011/07/01/machu-picchu-un-patrimoine-menace-par-le-

tourisme_1543457_3222.html 8 http://www.la-croix.com/Semaine-en-images/La-chapelle-Sixtine-menacee-par-les-touristes-_NG_-2010-09-21-

579077 9 http://www.lesechos.fr/17/07/2012/LesEchos/21228-040-ECH_l-everest-en-froid-avec-le-tourisme-de-masse.htm

Latest version 29/09

11

* Create a Tourist Chart common to States Parties listing the rules and principles that tourists tacitly commit to respect once they have their admission tickets. All tourism stakeholders will have an obligation to distribute it to their customers; * Control tourist flows: Establish daily and hourly visitors' quotas for the busiest sites. A badge for a particular time slot would be given to each visitor. When badges ran out, the following visitors would have to wait for the next time slot; * Set up protection zones around sites: particularly fragile pieces of heritage must be protected from tourist influx by such zones; * Implement entry prices for certain sites (lower for residents) as in Rwanda; * Language training of guards so that they can easily communicate with anyone who might go against the prescribed rules.

2.2) ARMED CONFLICTS AND TERRORISM

Challenge: During an armed conflict, destruction of cultural heritage can be part of collateral damage, but often constitutes a carefully thought-out strategy. A striking example is the intentional destruction of heritage by IS. Armed conflicts and terrorism imply wilful destruction and vandalism.

Theory

Legal basis: In 1954, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, a.k.a. the Hague Convention, was signed. It came as a reaction to the extensive destruction following World War II. This was the first international treaty with a universal vocation dedicated to protecting cultural heritage in times of armed conflict.

The Hague Convention has a protocol which prohibits the export of cultural property from occupied territory and requires its return. It has actually not been ratified by the United States or the United Kingdom, who are yet very active in artistic trade.10 103 countries have ratified the First Protocol, 68 have ratified the Second. The Second Protocol is also crucial since it provides for the potential activation of enhanced protection in Article 11 for cultural property of the highest significance for humanity: indeed, each Party may submit to the Committee a list of cultural property that may benefit from enhanced protection under certain conditions. Thus, the Parties to the conflict must then guarantee the immunity of cultural property under enhanced protection. Violation of this Protocol may lead to prosecution. Moreover, while referring

10 http://www.unesco.org/eri/la/convention.asp?order=alpha&language=E&KO=15391

Latest version 29/09

12

to the 1954 Hague Convention, the Second Protocol lists examples of safeguard measures for cultural property that can be taken in time of peace by States Parties against foreseeable effects of armed conflict, such as carrying out inventories, planning emergency measures to protect such property against the risk of fire or structural collapse or designating competent safeguarding authorities. However, the signatory States may be too few for such a text to have its full potential impact. Outside Conventions that specifically protect cultural property during armed conflict, international humanitarian law generally prohibits attacks against civilian property, including cultural property, in accordance with its principle of distinction. Furthermore, the 1977 Additional Protocols I and II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions about the protection of victims of armed conflict (respectively Articles 53 and 16 of these Protocols), prohibit any hostile act against property constituting "the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples" and any use of such objects to support the military effort. The Hague Convention and its Protocols may not apply to States Parties to the 1977 Additional Protocols I and II (174 for Protocol I and 168 for Protocol II), but those are still bound by the obligations of protection of cultural property under these texts. Beyond ratification, according to Boylan, "the major obstacle remains the neglect or refusal by States Parties to respect the rules which they have agreed to." Another example is the October 2003 UNESCO Declaration on the intentional destruction of cultural heritage.11 In the case of political reconfigurations or divisions, when territories fall apart as was the case of former Yugoslavia, heritage associated with a certain ethnic or cultural group is targeted (e.g. the bridge of Mostar, the bombing of the historic centre of Dubrovnik, or the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan). In wartime there is a distinction12 between (1) collateral damage/incident – what was destroyed or damaged by shelling intended to destroy something else (e.g. National Museum of Lebanon); (2) looting - in wartime, conservation areas are deserted or less protected, thus enabling a trade of antiquities; (3) cultural cleansing – according to Leturcq, enemies' monuments have always been deliberately damaged. He has identified a shift in recent years: "Heritage is targeted as heritage, as a legacy of the Other's past, which one seeks to degrade or even deny." Vandalism has shifted to deliberate destruction. Nations build their identities through art. Identities must therefore be destroyed through art.

11 http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17718&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html 12 Coissard Pascale – 2007, La protection du patrimoine culturel en cas de conflit armé : enjeux et limites du cadre international.

Latest version 29/09

13

The awareness of this challenge is illustrated in a 2012 resolution of the Security Council asking MINUSMA, in collaboration with UNESCO, to support Malian authorities in protecting cultural and historical sites in Mali.

Examples: Already in 2012, in Tripoli, Libya, fundamentalist Islamists had destroyed with backhoes the mausoleum of Muslim saint Al-Shaab al-Dahmani and desecrated his grave. They also blew up the mausoleum of Sheikh Abd As-Salam Al-Asmar. In late 2014, an iconic statue disappeared in Tripoli. Another example is the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan (Afghanistan) in 1998, which Mullah Omar had ordered, urged by the hardliners in his fundamentalist movement. On March 11, 2001, the two symbols were destroyed by troops sent by Osama bin Laden with rocket-launchers, shells fired from tanks and eventually with dynamite. But the most striking example of this trend towards intentional destruction is that of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (e.g.: the Mar Elian monastery, the archaeological site of Nimrud in Iraq, the Mosul Museum, Hatra...). The destruction acts are relayed by videos and pictures (e.g.: destruction of the Baalshamin Temple), and are clearly part of a provocative strategy. The UNESCO Director called it "a war crime and a considerable loss for the Syrian people and humanity". Measures have been implemented by archaeologists in Syria to repatriate more than 300,000 items to Damascus. Over 2,500 officials are thus acting to preserve what can be, often risking their lives, as did the director of Palmyra.

Note that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia sentenced Pavle Strugar, a retired general of the Yugoslav army, for intentional damage to a number of cultural and historic sites in Dubrovnik. The crucial way of dealing with this challenge is to develop an approach that is not just about acting retrospectively but also about preventing armed conflict and terrorism. While terrorism is inherently unpredictable, each State is a potential target, and it seems therefore necessary to develop an arsenal linked to prevention in all States Parties.

Recommendations: Speed up the ratification of The Hague Convention and its Protocols in order to

act quickly and effectively in times of conflict. Provide for sanctions for non-compliance with its provisions;

Systematically prosecute in case of damage or destruction of the World Heritage and effectively make its intentional destruction a war crime under Article 8 section 2 of the Rome Statue. In this regard, the States Parties to the 1972 Convention should support synergies with the 1954 Convention,

Latest version 29/09

14

especially through the enhanced protection mechanism provided for by the Second Protocol.13

Focus on museum staff training so that they are fully aware, as they are of the risk of fire for example, of items to save first, and how (stipulate safe locations where items can be stocked on national, or another State's territory);

Ensure the texts of Conventions on protection of cultural property are distributed (through training and raising awareness), as part of military training for the armed forces and civil education programs for the population, particularly for staff assigned to the Protection of Cultural Property;

Develop a preventive approach: establish "plans B" for movable heritage, such as an inventory of all national heritage in a broad sense, or microfilm the whole of the heritage, as done by Switzerland.

Systematically include the protection of cultural and historical sites in peace-keeping operations and military instructions of the States' armed forces. In that respect, an international force specialised in international humanitarian law and the protection of cultural heritage could be set up in the various relevant regional and international bodies in tandem with a similar force at national level.

2.3) LOOTING AND ILLICIT TRAFFICKING

Challenge: Looting can have multiple causes: heritage abandoned following heavy instabilities, poor population, greed, which greatly threatens heritage finding itself at the centre of illicit trafficking.

"Whatever property rights be, those vile speculators, whose honour is blinded by their interest, should not be permitted to destroy a historic and monumental building. There are

two things in a building: its use and its beauty. Its use belongs to the owner, its beauty to everyone, to you, to me, to us all. Destroying it is therefore exceeding one's rights."

- Victor Hugo

Legal basis: Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property - 1970 International humanitarian law (1954 Hague Convention, Articles 4 and 28 and the Second Protocol of 1999, Article 15) UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects, June 24, 1995

Theory

13http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Modif_WHformat_techsummary_fr.pdf

Latest version 29/09

15

Looting occurs especially in countries where political context is relatively unstable such as in African countries, where terracotta, statuettes, pottery, bronzes, or masks are then resold to another country thereby laundering the item and preventing UNESCO action. Looting is for many an important source of income.

Examples: It is particularly widespread in natural parks. Zakouma National Park in Chad or the Virunga Park are for instance often targeted by poachers who force entry to kill elephants for their ivory. The Museum of Baghdad has no fewer than 10,073 missing pieces. In Libya, trafficking in antiquities is particularly successful due to the fragile political context. In 2011, "the Treasure of Benghazi," a collection of 8,000 gold, silver and bronze coins disappeared. At least 15 sites may have been destroyed by inhabitants themselves to build houses. Similarly, in Syria, UNESCO has noted the proliferation of looting since the beginning of the war, as with the Al-Omari Mosque or many museums and archaeological sites. However, political instability is not always the cause of looting. In France, for example, the economic crisis may have led to more acts of that kind.14 Similarly, some looting target specific communities such as the Jewish community, whose graves were desecrated all over Europe.15 In 2014, an Englishman living in France burglarised several churches. Religious items (chalices, patens, ciboria...) were sold on the Internet. The population itself often opposes the looting as was the case in Cairo during the attempted looting of the museum or in Mali, where people risked their lives to protect some manuscripts by burying them themselves.

Furthermore, it must be emphasized that looters have diverse identities: local population, tourists, and professionals.

Examples: In Tanzania, the elephant population fell from 109,051 in 2009 to 43,330 in 2014. The cause is mainly poaching for ivory.

14 http://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2014/06/03/archeologie-la-france-zone-de-pillage_4430964_1650684.html 15 http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2015/02/17/01003-20150217ARTFIG00045-profanations-de-cimetieres-juifs-un-phenomene-europeen.php

Latest version 29/09

16

In Nepal there was extensive looting in the Kathmandu Valley after the earthquake in 2015. A tourist was arrested with a bronze bell in his bag. At the Coliseum in 2015, two female American tourists aged 21 and 25 were charged with aggravated damage to a monument after engraving their names on the amphitheatre. A Russian tourist who had also engraved his initials received a four months' suspended sentence and a $27,325 fine.

Recommendations: * Conduct an accurate inventory (with photographs) of items in museums, movable buildings and archaeological sites; * Carry out regular studies based on this inventory and complaints filed for looting; * Set up a National Body to fight against trafficking in cultural property; * Encourage the creation of specialised services within the police and custom forces to fight against the theft of works of art and suppress illicit traffic; * Ensure effective monitoring of sites; * Encourage ratification of the 1970 Convention and UNIDROIT; * Monitor suspicious Internet sales by introducing a liability shift to the hosting website, as done in Switzerland;

2.4) POPULATION GROWTH AND URBANISATION

Challenge: To meet the demands of mass tourism and/or rapid population growth, urbanisation policies distort part of the heritage by taking it out of its context.

Many developments are carried out on the sites in order to turn them into tourist areas. This rapid urbanisation to meet the demands of tourism has caused significant hygiene and health problems (waste collection, especially access to water).

Examples: One example is the restructuring of the centre of Mexico City as early as 1958, called "refunctionalisation" by the authorities." The poor suburbs have been turned into a CBD, and the historic centre into a museum to give it economic value. One can also mention the Mexican city of Puebla: an avenue has been redesigned on the River Walk model in San Antonio, USA. Three quarters of the old buildings have been replaced by new ones and by green spaces.

In addition, "giving priority to certain buildings and fledging tertiary activities has condemned productive activities deemed less prestigious as well as families with incomes too low to support the cost of restructuring." At the end of the day, "'refunctionalisation ' is prioritised, which implies replacing unprofitable residents and activities by culture, tourism and business". Moreover, "with the strengthening of the conservationist concept there is a danger of turning cities into lifeless museums –

Latest version 29/09

17

cold, empty, indifferent – after driving out the inhabitants and their productive activities.16 Furthermore, the demographic pressure on some countries drives them into urbanisation policies which again completely distort cities. Note also that conflict zones often lead to strong demographic pressure on neighbouring countries, pushing them into emergency urbanisation development.

Examples: A striking example of the problems linked to population growth is Virunga Park, on the Congolese side. Indeed, the population density – 5 people/km2 when it was created – has grown twentyfold. Populations that lack land, food and fuel tend to head towards the park. In Cairo, population increases precipitously every year (25 million in 2020), leading to a catastrophic urbanisation policy with districts sprouting randomly without any urban planning (no water or sewage). In Siem Reap, the population has increased from 173,000 inhabitants in 2008 to 250,000 in 2013. In Angkor, some inhabitants were displaced when water was put back into the temples' moat tanks, once surrounded by rice fields. This happened for instance with the medicinal temple Neak Poan, where no fewer than 20,000 people were displaced.

This reckless urbanisation can have a significant impact especially on the intangible cultural heritage. As for the tangible heritage, it has to be noted its context has a great relevance, and only the surrounding environment can express this context. Africa best illustrates the impact of demographics on urbanisation policies. Indeed, the urbanisation rate increased from 14.5% in 1950 to 25.7% in 1975, to 38.7% in 2007 and is forecast to be 61.8% in 2050. In view of these developments, the impact of demographics is not to be neglected. In Europe, many mistakes were made in terms of urbanism, which affected much of the heritage. Other countries should therefore be prevented from making the same mistakes in their development, while adjustments are still possible. The 1972 Convention and its guidelines may well provide for the creation of a protective buffer zone around a site when it is first registered on the List. However, despite this precaution, reasons for including properties on the Endangered Heritage List are often linked to disastrous urban development policies.

16 François Tomas, « Les temporalités du patrimoine et de l'aménagement urbain », Géocarrefour [En ligne], vol. 79/3 | 2004, published online on January 30, 2008

Latest version 29/09

18

Recommendation: -On reviewing urban projects, pay attention to their impact on heritage enhancement.

2.5) LACK OF AWARENESS Challenge: Knowing what cultural heritage represents would lead to less vandalism and more respect for the Others' cultural property. Similarly, increased awareness would also enable better conservation and the use of more appropriate techniques in the development of Heritage.

Legal basis: Article 7 of The Hague Convention (1954) urges military measures to raise awareness in the armed forces personnel about respect for peoples' cultures and cultural property. Similarly, Article 25 requests that the text of the Convention be widely distributed, including through military and civilian training programs, so that the whole population can be made aware of this. Its Second Protocol emphasises the effort required by Parties through education and information programs "to strengthen appreciation and respect for cultural property by their entire population" (Article 30). Similarly, Article 14 of the 2003 Convention on Intangible Heritage also calls on States Parties to raise awareness about this aspect.

Theory According to Coissard, "in case of conflict, educating soldiers about cultural heritage values could only be beneficial: if armies were aware of the cultural significance of certain items or buildings, then "collateral damage" would be reduced. This initiative has already been taken by the Archaeological Institute of America: in August 2005, its archaeologists suggested teaching history, archaeology and cultural heritage of the Middle East to troops leaving for Afghanistan or Iraq. The initiative was very well received by the Army. UNESCO and ICOMOS offer many information campaigns on cultural property, which can be addressed to soldiers, whether they are involved in an international or non-international armed conflict. Since education is another UNESCO battlefield, it seems entirely appropriate to give it this role."17 Moreover, and more generally, people are hardly aware of the various issues surrounding heritage and its irreplaceable value. Yet a country's heritage tells a history and therefore contributes to creating an identity. Indeed, according to UNESCO, every nation's heritage is "a stimulating wealth that increases opportunities for mankind to

17http://doc.sciencespolyon.fr/Ressources/Documents/Etudiants/Memoires/Cyberdocs/MFE2007/coissard_p/pdf/coissard_p.pdf

Latest version 29/09

19

blossom by encouraging every people and every group to thrive on their past, to welcome external inputs compatible with its own characteristics and thus perpetuate the process of its own creation." However, few people have knowledge about their own country's heritage. Improving heritage knowledge from an early age, would not only help to raise awareness in youths and counter challenges such as mass tourism, but would also develop a different approach to history and the traces it may have left in architecture for example. As seen earlier, a legal basis does exist. However, it is clear that these provisions are non-binding, which prevents the effective implementation of relevant measures.

Recommendation: Include heritage awareness in school curricula across the board. This could be

done in literature, history, geography and biology curricula.18 Include awareness of respect for cultural property in military training

programs. Promote public awareness events such as "Heritage Days". Promote citizen participation in heritage management process (Faro

Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society)

2.6) RESTORATION Challenge: Restorations are a real challenge in the face of heritage deterioration: techniques used, value of heritage to be preserved, reconciliation factor, significant cost.

Legal basis: International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (Charter of Venice, 1964), ICOMOS

Theory "Protecting culture means supporting peoples, giving them the strength to rebuild, and look to the future." as expressed by Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO, June 4, 2013. According to Ruskin, "what is called restoration is the worst form of destruction that a building can suffer." Of course, restoration techniques have evolved since the above statement, but many examples show that it does remain partially valid. Even more relevantly, "the UNESCO mission does not shrink from authenticating falsification." Such

18 http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/images/9_COM_Decisions_EN.pdf (pp. 10-11)

Latest version 29/09

20

a statement does call for some qualification, however since the Convention's Guidelines for the Implementation set out standards of integrity and authenticity for cultural properties, questions naturally arise about certain restoration processes that led to a total rebuild of the property: does a fully restored item or site have the same heritage value? Does symbolic value trump materiality?

Examples: After World War II, the Old Town in Warsaw was rebuilt as an exact replica, as well as many buildings around it. Ruskin mentions China, where the canal village of Lijiang was destroyed by an earthquake and was rebuilt as a rough replica. However, it was emptied of its inhabitants and now meets the standards of cultural tourism. In Myanmar, the site of Bagan is very controversial, since hundreds of monuments were hastily renovated using modern materials such as plaster or orange brick, thus denaturing the heritage. In Spain in 2012, a restored "Ecce Homo" by Elias Garcia Martinez caused a sensation, as Christ's features had been turned into a roughly painted head. Some churches actually cannot afford to hire experts and therefore appeal to other people, with the risk of altering the original work.

According to René Parenteau and Luc Champagne, "too formal an enhancement that relies heavily on the purist restoration of architectural elements with multiple urban designs desperately striving for old and authentic", not only drifts away from the ambitions of heritage policies, but also do not always manage to fool tourists. Simultaneously, some restorations help to breathe a "second life" into heritage sometimes heavily damaged over the years (by weathering) or due to conflicts. According to Egyptologist Tom Hardwick, "in the 19th century, it was common for large museums to exhibit casts made from original works for instance by Michelangelo without the public taking offense. Since travelling was much more difficult than today, the common thought was that it was better to see a replica of a major work than the original of a secondary one."19 Mass tourism has maintained a form of worship of the original: "It is still the question I get asked most often, 'Is it genuine?' There is an undeniable psychological element surrounding the aura, karma, aroma – whatever you wish to call it – of the original work that seems hardly replaceable."

19http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/services/tourisme loisirs/20140822tribbeb2cd5d9/egypte-le-tourisme-devient-durable-grace-a-l-art-de-la-replique-d-une-start-up.html

Latest version 29/09

21

Furthermore, restoration can also be appreciated due to its possible contribution to reconciliation. This can be linked with armed conflicts: destroyed heritage is part of the identity of a people tainted by this act of destruction. Rebuilding heritage is the first step towards healing the wounds of their identity and can play an important positive role for peace. For example, such heritage restoration could especially play an important role in the political process of peace related to Nagorno Karabakh. Similarly, it is worth mentioning here the work of the Council of Europe in the countries of the former Yugoslavia, which follow the same logic. However, restoration costs are often too high for developing countries, who therefore would rather leave the sites in disrepair. While part of the heritage to be preserved is in the hands of the poorest, subsidies often go to the wealthiest people. However, many initiatives are going in the right direction by calling for solidarity among States to ensure the preservation and restoration of World Heritage sites. Ultimately, it is about finding the right balance between the two.

Recommendations: * Prioritise regular maintenance of heritage; * Ensure transmission of know-how in the context of restoration; * In case of restoration, encourage the systematic use of both national and international expert networks so that they can assess the best techniques to be used for an inclusive, participatory and multidisciplinary process.

2.7) GLOBALISATION

"There is no such thing – nor can there ever be – a world civilisation in the absolute sense that is often given to this term, since civilisation implies the coexistence of cultures offering

maximum diversity, and even constitutes this very coexistence" - Claude Lévi-Strauss

Challenge: Heritage becomes a consumption tool and the increased tourist services' response harms the local culture which is at the very root of the value of this heritage.

Theory According to Cousin20, the emergence of mass culture compensates the lack of real culture "by making heritage artificially attractive through a (mental and material) conditioning that renders it visible and desirable, fit for (cultural) consumption.

20 Saskia Cousin, « L’Unesco et la doctrine du tourisme culturel », Civilisations, 57 | 2008, 41-56.

Latest version 29/09

22

Ultimately, the economic impact may be beneficial (construction of tourist facilities such as hotels around sites), but the sociocultural impact is negative (suppression of creative activities related to local culture and its identity). There is currently a form of "heritage museumisation". Due to this, local populations can be rejected in the face of registration of a property as World Heritage. This stops local people from fully enjoying the property and therefore affects the transmission of intangible cultural heritage. Moreover, experts' statuses tend to be more recognised than indigenous knowledge. Globalisation is therefore a great threat, especially for intangible cultural heritage. The homogenisation of lifestyles, intensification of trade, and mobility all have a direct or indirect influence which may weigh on and alter traditional practices. For example, certain ceremonies or rites are now conducted in front of tourists, making them superficial where they used to required intimacy and respect. This contributes to treating "culture as folklore". Furthermore, globalisation also implies increased migration flows. According to Dolff-Bonekämper21, "due to human migration, there may be many objects preserved in collections remote from where they were made, and people living very far from where they were born or where their families lived before migrating; therefore, the concept of social structures and construction of local heritage needs to be rethought." Finally, the homogenisation caused by globalisation is obvious with the implantation of the same multinationals, especially in historic town centres. Big corporate names such as fast food and some luxury brands can consistently be found there. On top of harming local trade it creates a form of standardisation of town centres where the same companies can always be found.

2.8) CLIMATE CHANGE

Challenge: The impact of climate change on tangible and intangible cultural heritage are largely neglected though numerous.

Theory Causes: intensification of extreme weather events, rainfall, rising temperatures, decreased humidity, change in groundwater levels, frequency of floods, forest fires, landslides, heat waves, coastal erosion , rising sea levels, drought...

21 Dolff-Bonekämper, G. (2010), Patrimoine culturel et conflit : le regard de l’Europe. Museum International (French Edition), 62: 14–20

Latest version 29/09

23

Non-exhaustive list of potential threats due to climate change: Impact on intangible heritage: indigenous and marginalised populations are

especially exposed and vulnerable; Growing number of climate refugees will affect transmission of intangible cultural

heritage; Erosion of limestone monument façades exposed to rain; Darkening of the buildings' façades sheltered from rain; Crystallisation of salts in capillary rise at base of walls; Devastating effects of freeze-thaw. Rising sea levels Threats to natural heritage such as Peninsula Valdés (Argentina)22

Combined with the first factor explained above – mass tourism – and the latter, the effect on Heritage could be multiplied (e.g. erosion of stones, darkening of facades). However: despite UNESCO reports on the subject, the list of threats is essentially descriptive.

Examples of endangered sites: Venice and its lagoon, London and the banks of the Thames, Prague, monuments along the Seine in Paris, Mont-Saint-Michel, the Lascaux cave, the Grande Île in Strasbourg, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, Bangkok, the Qori Kalis glacier in Peru, the Maldives, Machu Picchu, Manú National Park in Peru, the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra in Indonesia.

Recommendations: * A quantitative and proactive, rather than subjective and qualitative, approach; * Consultations with experts in anticipation of climate change; * Encourage a comprehensive approach of Heritage by considering it in its global environment; * National assessment of the list of World Heritage potentially endangered by climate change in order to take action to limit the risks.

2.9) LACK OF OR INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION BY SOME COUNTRIES

22 file:///C:/Users/S%C3%A9nat_1/Downloads/publi_paper_series_37_fr.pdf , viewed in September 2015

Latest version 29/09

24

Challenge: Much of the tangible and intangible cultural heritage has not been reported by countries, thus preventing its protection.

Note for instance the absence of necessary incentives for an increased representation of African heritage, which only had 86 sites registered in 2012, and 89 in 2015. Some States such as Angola, Burundi or Equatorial Guinea had not yet registered any property since the Convention had been adopted and ratified. In 2000, the World Heritage List comprised 630 sites and monuments, of which 55 % were located in European countries, 11 % in the Arab World and 1% in Oceania. In 2015, the list includes 1,031 registered items, 48% in Europe and North America, 23% in Asia-Pacific, 8% in the Arab States, and 13% in Latin America and the Caribbean. It is thus important to work towards increasing awareness of heritage, since many States can ignore the benefits of including it on the UNESCO list. Similarly, some States may potentially require expertise to help them determine which heritage could be registered and above all how to do so. We should especially applaud training work carried out by ICCROM that fits perfectly into this line. Beyond expertise, logistical and financial support should also be provided. Note however that the listed Heritage should not be the only one to receive special attention. Much of the heritage is not included in the list, which does not stop it from having a special significance in the identity of individuals and in this sense, it requires greater protection. It should also be noted that there may be national recognition problems: certain types of heritage are not necessarily recognized as they belong to minorities or refer to inglorious historical periods or times of occupation. At European level, the Faro Framework Convention tries to answer the question of the Others' heritage. In that perspective, the enhanced Protection provided by the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention is much more inclusive than the World Heritage Convention. Enhanced protection aims to prevent the risks of armed conflict, but also those related to natural disasters.

Recommendations: Develop incentives in some countries to achieve a certain balance between

geographical areas at the level of the World Heritage List; Ratify the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention and suggest

including important properties on the list of cultural property under enhanced protection;

Latest version 29/09

25

If necessary, develop an exchange of good practice between States so that they can help each other in identifying various forms of potential heritage on their territory.

Nine challenges – one goal

The nine challenges discussed above may well be distinct, but their accumulation has a multiplier effect on the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity. Most of these challenges do require quick action, precisely because they are growing more significant and substantial over time. With increased mobility and the development of certain sites, tourists continue to rush towards globally coveted heritage. Demographic forecasts indicate an increased pressure on cities and therefore on urbanisation projects. Terrorism and intentional destruction of heritage are growing to an unprecedented scale. Societies develop and in doing so, cause a standardisation of lifestyles. Issues such as looting and illicit trafficking are all the more critical in that they partially feed terrorism due to their financial gains. The role of UNESCO, as seen earlier, is crucial but requires a deepening towards stricter standards that are more focused on risk prevention. All regions of the world should be represented. Common to all these issues is that they affect – albeit heterogeneously and in various forms – all countries and continents. Therefore, global challenges must call for global solutions. The purpose of this note is to raise awareness of the fact that we all share the responsibility to act, by impacting our own levels of government, on the basis of a common thought process based on the premise that safeguarding heritage means protecting our identity and our history.

III) CONCLUSION

Latest version 29/09

26

Set up a tourism charter; Control tourist flows; Protection zones around sites; Language training of tourist guards to make them more operational; Assess impact of climate change on listed heritage; Speed up ratification of The Hague Convention and its Protocols; Legal proceedings in case of deterioration and/or destruction of World Heritage; Develop a preventive approach to heritage in case of conflict: train staff,

systematically carry out inventories, establish evacuation plans of movable heritage, include heritage experts in peacekeeping missions.

Carry out inventory of items in museums; Follow up on looting complaints; Monitor suspicious Internet sales; Pay increased attention to impact of urban projects on heritage; Integrate heritage theme in school curricula; Incentives to register Heritage in every State.

Appendix Some international institutions and associations carry out missions for heritage preservation and conservation. They act through reference texts (charters, recommendations, etc.) to define guidelines for heritage conservation. They also develop training and awareness modules, and act at international, national or local levels. The main ones are: ICCROM - HTTP://WWW.ICCROM.ORG/ ICOMOS - HTTP://WWW.ICOMOS.ORG/EN/ IUCN - http://www.iucn.org/ ICOM - http://icom.museum/ IFLA - http://www.ifla.org/ Bouclier Bleu - http://www.bouclier-bleu.fr/

IV) ONE GOAL...AND PROPOSALS