Tool 11 - Outcomes: Monitoring State of Conservation

1. To establish whether there are monitoring programmes in place to assess the state of conservation of the property and the conditions of its attributes.
2. To ascertain whether those monitoring programmes are adequate to capture information that will help determine if the Outstanding Universal Value and other important values of the property are being maintained.
3. To establish whether monitoring programmes are adequate to assess whether the management system is also delivering expected services and benefits.
4. To assess whether findings from monitoring programmes are being used to make improvements to the management system in response to gaps and challenges identified and/or in response to new and emerging needs.
5. To identify follow-up actions to improve existing monitoring programmes, where needed.

This is the most challenging part of the assessment, because it requires judgements to be made about long-term trends in the conservation of the World Heritage All inherited assets which people value for reasons beyond mere utility. Heritage is a broad concept and includes shared legacies from the natural environment, the creations of humans and the creations and interactions between humans and nature. It encompasses built, terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments, landscapes and seascapes, biodiversity, geodiversity, collections, cultural practices, knowledge, living experiences, etc.   property or other heritage place. Tools 9 and 10 helped you to understand whether management actions listed in the management plan, work plan or similar instruments had been completed and expected outputs produced. However, these outputs, while being important as a way of examining management performance, do not provide you with all the information needed to judge whether desired outcomes are being achieved, factors affecting the property are being dealt with and, most importantly, whether the Outstanding Universal Value and other important values of the property are being maintained.

For example, a desired outcome might be to increase the population of an endangered animal species above a certain threshold, while an associated output might be to undertake a set number of boundary patrols within a specified time period. However, undertaking patrols is not the same as saving the endangered species, which could be killed by poachers who learn to avoid the patrols. A second example of a desired outcome could be to prevent further deterioration of highly important rock paintings, with an associated output being the installation of access platforms that prevent visitors from touching the art. Nevertheless, the rock art can continue to deteriorate because visitors might step off the platforms or climb over barriers. Delivering outputs therefore does not necessarily equate to the achievement of desired outcomes. In the examples given, desired outcomes need to be assessed by regularly counting the population numbers of the endangered species or by regularly assessing the condition of the rock paintings.

Monitoring and assessing the state of conservation of a World Heritage All inherited assets which people value for reasons beyond mere utility. Heritage is a broad concept and includes shared legacies from the natural environment, the creations of humans and the creations and interactions between humans and nature. It encompasses built, terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments, landscapes and seascapes, biodiversity, geodiversity, collections, cultural practices, knowledge, living experiences, etc.   property are the most demanding parts of management and can also be the most expensive. Hence, you should take care to avoid unnecessary costs and time commitments. This therefore requires carefully planned and implemented monitoring programmes (often called ‘monitoring systems’). While some World Heritage All inherited assets which people value for reasons beyond mere utility. Heritage is a broad concept and includes shared legacies from the natural environment, the creations of humans and the creations and interactions between humans and nature. It encompasses built, terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments, landscapes and seascapes, biodiversity, geodiversity, collections, cultural practices, knowledge, living experiences, etc.   properties have robust monitoring programmes, many do not. If you consider that you need to develop a new monitoring programme or strengthen an existing one, you should not complete Worksheet 11 at this point. Instead, note the need to develop and/or substantially revise the existing monitoring programme in the row on ‘Gaps and challenges’, and discuss what is required.

The purpose of this worksheet is to help you analyse and summarize the status and trends related to the conservation of the attributes that convey the Outstanding Universal Value and other important values of the property, based on the data collected through your monitoring programmes.

The first point to discuss is how best to use this worksheet to complement what you already use as part of your management system. Does your monitoring programme cover more or less the same parameters as those listed in Worksheet 11, or would your programme benefit from adding some of the parameters? Maybe you feel that the opposite is true, and your monitoring programme is more detailed and comprehensive than that suggested in Worksheet 11?

Do you have a comprehensive list of indicators that you feel are adequate and provide you with a clear picture of how well you are maintaining the values of your property? If you feel that completing Worksheet 11 will not be useful in this part of the management effectiveness evaluation, you can replace the worksheet with what you already have. In this case, you should note this decision and explain the reasons for it in your overall assessment report. An important thing to check before you make such a decision is to verify whether your monitoring programme covers and/or relates to the key attributes of your property. In addition, look through the reflection questions provided below to make sure that you do not miss important issues requiring further consideration.

Worksheet 11 is structured in a way to help you to quickly summarize and visualize findings. The different columns in the worksheet allow you to insert information in written as well as in graphic form, using a simple rating system to help you describe the state of conservation of the attributes, and any trends. This system integrates two types of information: i) the current state of the attributes (see Figure 11.1 for four suggested categories); and ii) the trend (that is, whether the condition of the attributes is improving, stable or deteriorating). To make these judgements, remember to look back at the information compiled in Worksheet 2 on factors affecting the property and how those factors are threatening and/or impacting the attributes.

Reflection questions:

• What has been the basis for developing indicators to monitor the condition of the attributes at your World Heritage property A cultural, natural or mixed heritage place inscribed on the World Heritage List and therefore considered to be of OUV for humanity. The responsibility for nominating a property to the World Heritage List falls upon the State(s) Party(ies) where it is located. The World Heritage Committee decides whether a property should be inscribed on the World Heritage List, taking into account the technical recommendations of the Advisory Bodies following rigorous evaluation processes.
  When used as a general term, World Heritage refers to all the natural, cultural and mixed properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. or other heritage place?
• Do existing indicators cover the attributes that provide a good understanding of whether or not the Outstanding Universal Value of the property is being maintained? Do they relate to tangible as well as intangible attributes? Do the attributes listed in Worksheet 11 align with those identified in Worksheet 1?
• Are the indicators current or are some of them no longer applicable?
• What is the relationship between the indicator and the measure of the condition of the attributes? Is it a direct or indirect relationship?
• Where possible, have thresholds been identified?
• Are the indicators sufficient to enable an assessment of the overall condition of the property or place? If yes, are there some indicators that are unnecessary or unhelpful? If no, what additional indicators might be useful?
• What does the rating system tell you about the overall condition of the property or place? Are there some types of attributes in good condition while others are in poor or critical condition? What are the reasons for this (e.g. insufficient priority given to the attribute)? How might these reasons be addressed?