2. Implications for Canada's Revised Tentative List Relating to the Global Strategy and IUCN Thematic Studies

Trends and Directions from the Global Strategy

The World Heritage Committee first raised the issue of what might eventually comprise the World Heritage List in 1979 when it began what was then referred to as the “Global Study.” At its meeting in 1994 the World Heritage Committee adopted A Global Strategy for a Balanced and Representative World Heritage List. ⁽¹⁾ . Since then there has been a series of regional meetings on the topic as well as two expert meetings: Parc national de la Vanoise, France, in 1996 ⁽²⁾, and Amsterdam in 1998 ⁽³⁾ . In addition, the 1999 General Assembly of State Parties to the World Heritage Convention has addressed the issue ⁽⁴⁾, as did the “Consultative Body” report of 1998 ⁽⁵⁾.

A substantial record of documentation has thus been produced on the topic. Over the same period, other changes adopted by the World Heritage Committee had further implications to the preparation of Tentative Lists. These included a change in wording of the four natural site criteria and the rewording of two cultural criteria, C (iv) and (v), to cover “cultural landscapes.” Concomitantly, a regular updating of the Operational Guidelines⁽⁶⁾ was undertaken to take into account issues such as serial sites and extensions.

After distilling this volume of material, nine new policy directions with implications for a new Tentative List for Canada are as follows:

• There is renewed encouragement for State Parties to re-examine their Tentative Lists, concentrating on “categories of heritage that are still under-represented” and to resubmit them every 5–10 years.
• What is “under-represented” on the World Heritage List is partially derived from thematic studies conducted by the advisory bodies.
• A report on implementation of the Global Strategy provided to the World Heritage Committee in 1998 noted five regions of the world as “under-represented” including the Arctic and Subarctic as well as coastal and marine sites.
• Greater attention be given to nominations where there are outstanding interactions between human populations and their environments.
• Growing awareness of the need to consult with indigenous people when preparing Tentative Lists and nominations - as was evidenced in the proposal to establish World Heritage Indigenous People Council of Experts Organisation (WHIPCEO).
• An annual limit on the number of new nominations that will be reviewed will be imposed by the World Heritage Committee. Priorities to be given to under-represented countries, regions and categories.
• Encouragement is given to submit a joint nomination when the property extends beyond national boundaries.
• The possibility exists to propose a serial nomination of properties in different locations in situations where it is the series as such that is of “outstanding universal value”.
• Extensions to existing World Heritage sites can be proposed but, if these are more than simple modifications to the boundary, a new nomination will be required.