- ICOMOS Analysis of 2013 nominations
- 1 Quality and complexity of nomination dossiers
- 2 ICOMOS evaluations
- 3 Strengthening of dialogue with State Parties
- 4 “Referred back” nominations – “Deferred” nominations
- 5 "Minor" modifications to boundaries
- 6 Serial nominations and extensions
- 7 Development projects
- 8 Issue of calendar and timing
- 9 Upstream process
- 10 Integrated management in natural reserves
- All Pages
4 “Referred back” nominations – “Deferred” nominations
At the request of the World Heritage Committee, ICOMOS and IUCN presented at the 34th session in Brasilia an information document concerning the processes, points of reference and time constraints arising from decisions to refer back or defer the examination of a nomination.
ICOMOS wishes to once again express its concerns about the difficulties raised when a “deferred” recommendation is changed into a “referred back” recommendation, which does not allow the advisory bodies to carry out an appropriate evaluation of nominations which are in many cases entirely new.
ICOMOS has moreover carried out two advisory missions for “referred back” properties, at the request of the World Heritage Committee at its 36th session. This process is not covered by the Operational Guidelines and its implementation may prove to be complex.
In its recommendations, ICOMOS clearly distinguishes between nominations which are recommended to be referred back and those which are deferred. For referred back nominations, Outstanding Universal Value has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of ICOMOS; supplementary information must be supplied to satisfy other requirements of Operational Guidelines, but no further technical evaluation mission will be required. For deferred nominations, the very nature of the information requested (a more thorough study, major reconsideration of boundaries, a request for a substantial revision, or serious gaps as regards management and conservation issues) means that a new mission and consideration by the full ICOMOS World Heritage Panel are necessary to evaluate the nomination again, and to ensure that it has the consideration needed to advance the nomination further.