Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context PDF

Published in 2022 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France; the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), Via di San Michele 13, Rome, Italy; the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), 11 rue du Séminaire de Conflans, 94220 Charenton-le-Pont, France and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Rue Mauverney 28, 1196 Gland, Switzerland. © UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN, 2022 ISBN 978-92-3-100535-0 This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbyncsa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS or IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS or IUCN and do not commit the Organizations. Publication Coordinators: Laura Frank (UNESCO), Eugene Jo (ICCROM) Authors: Sarah Court (ICCROM), Eugene Jo (ICCROM), Richard Mackay (ICOMOS), Mizuki Murai (IUCN), Riki Therivel (Impact Assessment Specialist) Copyeditor: Julie Wickenden Cover photo: Participants of the 2018 People, Nature, Culture ICCROM course at the Railway Museum, Livingstone, Zambia. © Sarah Court Graphic design: Guilder Design Cover design: Felipe Echeverri Velasco and Alberto José Moncayo Illustrations: Felipe Echeverri Velasco and Alberto José Moncayo The source of all the figures in this manual is UNESCO/ICCROM/ICOMOS/IUCN. 2022. Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context. Paris, UNESCO. With the financial support of the Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment SHORT SUMMARY Our World Heritage faces threats – Impact assessments offer solutions As the World Heritage Convention celebrates its 50th anniversary in 2022, over 1100 sites around the world are recognized as World Heritage - places that are so valuable to humanity that there conservation has been deemed our collective responsibility. Yet many of these exceptional places face increasing pressure from diverse types of development projects within and around the sites. Assessing the impacts of such projects – before deciding to proceed with their implementation – is essential to both prevent damage to World Heritage and identify sustainable options. The Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context is the go-to reference that explains the process for achieving these goals. Offering practical tips and tools including checklists and a glossary, it provides a framework for conducting impact assessments for cultural and natural heritage sites. Developed by UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee, ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN, this manual fosters cross-sectoral, Impact multidisciplinary collaboration to identify solutions for Assessments both protecting World Heritage sites and supporting requested by the World good quality and appropriate development. States Heritage Committee for Parties to the World Heritage Convention, heritage managers, decision-makers, planners and developers 1 in 8 are invited to use it to help realise our collective World Heritage commitment to passing on our precious heritage to sites future generations. ‘Since wars begin in the minds of men and women it is in the minds of men and women that the defences of peace must be constructed’ ABOUT THE WORLD HERITAGE RESOURCE MANUAL SERIES Since the World Heritage Convention was adopted in 1972, the World Heritage List has continually evolved and is growing steadily. With this growth, a critical need has emerged for providing guidance to States Parties on the implementation of the Convention. Various expert meetings and results of Periodic Reporting have identified the need for more focused training and capacity development in specific areas where States Parties and World Heritage site managers require greater support. The development of a series of World Heritage Resource Manuals is a response to this need. The publication of the series is a joint undertaking by UNESCO as the Secretariat of the Convention and the three Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee (ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN). The World Heritage Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, Lithuania, July 2006) supported this initiative and requested that the Advisory Bodies and UNESCO proceed with the preparation and publication of a number of thematic Resource Manuals. The Resource Manuals are intended to provide focused guidance on the implementation of the Convention to States Parties, heritage protection authorities, local governments, site managers and local communities linked to World Heritage sites, as well as other stakeholders in the identification and conservation process. They aim to provide knowledge and assistance in ensuring a representative and credible World Heritage List consisting of well-protected and effectively managed properties. The manuals are being developed as user-friendly tools for capacity-building and awareness-raising on the World Heritage Convention. They can be used independently for self-guided learning as well as material in training workshops and should complement the basic provisions for understanding the text of the Convention itself and the Operational Guidelines for implementation. The titles in this series are produced as PDF online documents which can be freely downloaded and GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS accessible at https://whc.unesco.org/en/resourcemanuals/. 1 FOREWORD BY THE DIRECTOR OF WORLD HERITAGE Over more than 75 years since its foundation, UNESCO has developed a body of international standard- setting instruments for safeguarding the world’s creative diversity. UNESCO’s conventions, declarations and recommendations cover all aspects of tangible and intangible cultural heritage, collectively forming a network of legal tools designed to support Member States in their efforts to protect heritage and creativity in all regions of the world. The 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, widely known as the World Heritage Convention, is considered one of the most successful international instruments for conserving heritage sites. As the first ever international legal instrument to encompass both natural and cultural heritage, it represents a unique and powerful link between the instruments dealing with cultural heritage and those addressing issues such as natural heritage conservation, biodiversity, or climate change. Furthermore, the network of over 1,154 properties currently inscribed on the World Heritage List reflects the great diversity of heritage and has become a crucial testing ground for all aspects of heritage conservation. With the celebration, in 2022, of the 50th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention, all World Heritage actors are critically reflecting on the extraordinary results achieved since 1972, as well as on the road ahead, in the spirit of “The Next 50: World Heritage as a source of resilience, humanity and innovation.” This publication touches on many critical areas of reflection after half a century of World Heritage in action: climate change and heritage conservation, sustainable tourism, the growing role of digital communication, and the inherent resilience of exceptional heritage that plays a role in the life of communities. One of the World Heritage Committee’s recurring concerns when reviewing the state of conservation of properties remains the reliability and timeliness of assessments for projects that may have an impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties. Addressing development needs, the well-being of communities and the protection of heritage can be challenging, and dedicated tools are required to help States Parties to the Convention fulfil their duties to the highest possible standards. Over the past decades, the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee (ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN) developed dedicated guidance documents to assist States Parties in following the current best GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS practices for heritage conservation: the 2011 ICOMOS Guidance on Impact Assessment for Cultural World Heritage Properties and the 2013 IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment. Since their publication, the Committee has invited States Parties to make good use of these guidance documents when it requests the commissioning and review of impact assessments. This Guidance and Toolkit is a joint publication of UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee. A unique contribution to the heritage field, it aims to guide its users along the required steps to carry out impact assessments for projects of all types and scopes at all World Heritage properties – cultural, natural or mixed – using the same adaptable framework. Therefore, this publication would not have been possible without the technical expertise as well as deep and continuous engagement of the Advisory Bodies. 2 Created over several years and aligned with the highest current methodological standards, this framework provides States Parties, project stakeholders and independent experts with practical guidance on how to commission, conduct and review impact assessments for heritage sites. In the spirit of the 1972 UNESCO Recommendation concerning the protection, at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage, this methodology is also designed to apply to all forms of heritage beyond those inscribed on the World Heritage List. I am particularly pleased that the revised Guidance also provides a resource for capacity building and awareness raising about the management of World Heritage properties, which can be used either as part of organised group training activities or for self-study. This additional tool, directly inspired by the guiding texts and principles of the World Heritage Convention, was designed to be as user-friendly and adaptable as possible and will doubtlessly have a very positive impact on exceptional heritage across the globe. Finally, I would like to extend UNESCO’s thanks to the Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment, which supported the development of this guidance through the ICCROM-IUCN World Heritage Leadership Programme. I do not doubt that, as many stakeholders make use of the Guidance and Toolkit, they can take further steps in mobilising support and action to preserve and protect our shared heritage for the benefit of future generations. Lazare Eloundou Assomo Director of World Heritage GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 3 FOREWORD BY THE ADVISORY BODIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE This Guidance and Toolkit is a joint publication of UNESCO, the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). This work has been generously supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment, through the framework of the ICCROM-IUCN World Heritage Leadership Programme. The objective of this document is to provide impact assessment guidance for World Heritage properties, using a framework that can be applied to both natural and cultural properties and to small- or large-scale projects, either within broader Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA), or as a stand- alone Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). The scoping, research and collaborative drafting process, which included numerous meetings and workshops in many parts of the world, started in September 2018. In line with current best practice in impact assessment methodologies, this Guidance has been prepared using an integrated approach, taking into account the numerous requests and needs that were identified by diverse stakeholders of the World Heritage Convention through ICCROM’s related capacity-building activities. It incorporates and replaces the 2011 ICOMOS Guidance on Impact Assessment for Cultural World Heritage Properties and the 2013 IUCN World Heritage Advice Note on Environmental Assessment, and is now the most updated reference on conducting and reviewing impact assessments for all World Heritage properties. The methodology in this Guidance can also be used for other diverse types of heritage place. The document provides an outline of the World Heritage system, high-level principles and an explanation of the process for undertaking ESIAs or HIAs. There is also a glossary, suggested toolkit and checklists for application. The new Guidance will help States Parties, heritage managers, decision-makers, project proponents, communities and others in managing World Heritage properties where a transformative action is proposed or undertaken in or around the property which may affect the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). In addition to providing a framework in which to conduct impact assessments in the context of World Heritage properties, the Guidance also serves as a resource for capacity building and awareness raising about the management of World Heritage properties. It will form the basis of related capacity-building GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS activities provided by the World Heritage Centre, Advisory Bodies, and the UNESCO Category 2 Centres, and can also be used independently for self-directed learning. It is intended to support implementation of the World Heritage Convention, along with the Operational Guidelines. The Advisory Bodies are positive that this resource manual will be useful to all those involved with World Heritage, to identify solutions for both protecting World Heritage sites and supporting good quality and appropriate sustainable development. ICCROM, IUCN, ICOMOS 4 CONTENTS FOREWORD BY THE DIRECTOR OF WORLD HERITAGE............................................................. 2 FOREWORD BY THE ADVISORY BODIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE......... 4 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 6 2 PRINCIPLES......................................................................................................................................... 7 3 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT...................................... 10 3.1 The World Heritage Convention................................................................................................ 10 3.2 World Heritage properties...........................................................................................................12 3.3 World Heritage management and governance as a foundation for impact assessment......... 15 3.4 Integrating a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention....................................................................................................................16 4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE.....................................................................17 4.1 Impact assessment......................................................................................................................17 4.2 Types of impact assessment....................................................................................................... 20 4.3 Assessing impacts on World Heritage....................................................................................... 22 4.4 Determining the type of impact assessment needed................................................................ 22 5 ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE AS PART OF A WIDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT.................................. 24 6 STAND-ALONE ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE......................................................................................................................... 29 6.1 What are stand-alone impact assessments?.............................................................................. 29 6.2 Participation: How should rights-holders, local communities and other stakeholders be engaged?........................................................................................................... 30 6.3 Proactive problem solving...........................................................................................................32 6.4 Screening: Is an impact assessment needed?............................................................................32 6.5 Scoping: What should be assessed?........................................................................................... 34 6.6 Baseline assessment................................................................................................................... 36 6.7 The proposed action and alternatives.........................................................................................38 6.8 Identifying and predicting impacts...........................................................................................40 GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 6.9 Evaluating impacts...................................................................................................................... 44 6.10 Mitigation and enhancement......................................................................................................45 6.11 Reporting..................................................................................................................................... 48 6.12 Reviewing the report................................................................................................................... 50 6.13 Decision-making.......................................................................................................................... 51 6.14 Follow-up......................................................................................................................................52 ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................................54 GLOSSARY............................................................................................................................................... 55 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................... 64 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................................... 67 APPENDIX: TOOLS............................................................................................................................... 68 CONTACT INFORMATION................................................................................................................. 87 5 1. INTRODUCTION This Guidance explains how impact assessments can be used to protect the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties in order to manage continuity and change by informing good decision- making in the context of UNESCO’s Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage – the ‘World Heritage Convention’ (UNESCO, 1972). The Convention was adopted at a time of great concern about the effects of rapid transformations taking place in the modern world. Fifty years later, the Convention has been ratified by 194 States Parties, who have put forward more than 1,000 heritage places for inscription, which are celebrated for their Outstanding Universal Value. At the same time, these transformations have become even more intense, and do not always benefit from prior reflection on the need to preserve the balance between people and their natural and cultural environment. Both the natural and the cultural heritage are important to the entire global community – and global cooperation is essential to ensure that heritage is not only protected but also given a role in contemporary society and handed over to future generations in the best possible condition. Changes both within and outside World Heritage properties need to be managed in line with the Convention’s objectives. Impact assessment can be critical for this and indeed has long been used as a tool in the context of World Heritage properties. The World Heritage Committee has requested that impact assessments should give greater consideration to the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties, thereby supporting States Parties in meeting their obligations under the Convention. This Guidance is aimed at both individuals familiar with impact assessment and those involved in the management and governance of World Heritage. It is structured as follows: Section 2 contains the underlying principles for impact assessments in the context of World Heritage Section 3 explains World Heritage and the concepts on which it is based Section 4 discusses the need for impact assessment and describes the different types of assessment Section 5 addresses cases where an impact assessment is mandatory within a national or other framework and World Heritage considerations also need to be included ection 6 addresses cases where an impact assessment is required to meet World Heritage obligations S but would not otherwise be carried out within the national framework (a ‘stand-alone assessment’) A detailed Glossary explains the technical terms used in this Guidance GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS Appendices contain tools which can be used by practitioners during an impact assessment at a World Heritage property. The tools are provided as general templates to suggest one of many possible approaches, and they may be further adapted and improved as appropriate. 6 2. PRINCIPLES This section discusses the principles that should underpin all impact assessments of proposed actions that could affect World Heritage properties and their Outstanding Universal Value. 1. By signing UNESCO’s Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, each State Party has pledged to protect and conserve World Heritage. The States Parties to the Convention have an obligation to identify, protect, conserve, present and transmit to future generations their cultural and natural heritage, as well as ensuring that the heritage has a function in the life of the community. Decisions about any proposed actions should ensure the protection and conservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of their World Heritage properties. In turn, this may require protection of other heritage/conservation values. Should a World Heritage property deteriorate to the extent that it has lost those characteristics which determined its inclusion on the World Heritage List, the World Heritage Committee can ultimately decide to delete the property from the List. ➜ World Heritage Convention Articles 4, 5 etc. 2. Impact assessment can help achieve sustainable development that is compatible with the protection and conservation of World Heritage. States Parties have committed to protect and conserve World Heritage while optimizing its potential to contribute to sustainable development. Impact assessment can be used to evaluate the need for a proposed action, and its consequences, so that environmental, social and economic outcomes can be achieved without damaging Outstanding Universal Value. It can also identify fundamental incompatibilities between proposed actions and the primacy of protecting Outstanding Universal Value. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 14bis; Policy for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention; UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development 3. States Parties have an obligation to notify the UNESCO World Heritage Centre in advance before considering any proposed action that may have an impact on World Heritage. This applies to any proposed action that could reasonably be expected to affect the World Heritage GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS property’s Outstanding Universal Value, whether in the property itself, its buffer zone or the wider setting. The World Heritage Committee or the UNESCO World Heritage Centre may also request that an impact assessment be prepared and submitted, which should be done before any irreversible decisions are taken. The impact assessment should inform the decision to proceed with a proposed action or not, so a decision should never be taken before the assessment, or influence its outcome. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 110, 112, 118bis, 172 7 PRINCIPLES 2 4. Any impact assessment on a World Heritage property should address Outstanding Universal Value specifically, as well as other heritage/conservation values. In many countries, proposed actions that may have an impact on World Heritage will be evaluated through national or other frameworks as part of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment or Strategic Environmental Assessment. In these cases, World Heritage should be addressed specifically within the broader assessment. When a proposed action is not subject to this type of planning process, a stand-alone Heritage Impact Assessment should be carried out. In both cases, the assessment needs to clearly address potential impacts on the attributes of the property which convey Outstanding Universal Value, as well as other heritage/conservation values. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 110, 118bis 5. Impact assessment should begin at the earliest consideration of a proposed action that may impact on World Heritage, and should continue during and after the action’s development and execution. Any decision about whether impact assessment is needed (‘screening’) should treat World Heritage properties as sensitive and valued. A precautionary approach should be taken: an impact assessment should always be carried out, unless it can be clearly shown that the proposed action will not affect the World Heritage property and its Outstanding Universal Value. This is the case even if the proposed action would have no other impacts. This allows heritage to be adequately considered in advance, and for the proposed action to be adjusted, relocated or prevented, if necessary, before commitments are made or irreversible activities occur. If the proposed action proceeds, follow-up will be needed during and after its implementation and, when appropriate, during decommissioning and recovery. Monitoring will indicate if and when further responses are needed to ensure that World Heritage is continuously protected. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 110, 118bis, 172 6. I mpact assessment should be carried out by specialists with the relevant expertise. The team of specialists carrying out impact assessments together should have relevant expertise in: The World Heritage Convention The specific heritage place (including attributes which may be affected) The proposed action While some exceptions may be possible, a multisectoral, multidisciplinary and independent team will be needed. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 14 7. Impact assessment should promote and encourage the effective, inclusive and equitable participation GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT of rights-holders, including Indigenous peoples, local communities and other stakeholders. One of the World Heritage Committee’s Strategic Objectives is to ‘enhance the role of communities in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention’. All rights-holders and other stakeholders should be identified early and consulted, to allow their views and concerns to be meaningfully considered in the assessment. The United Nations 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples also states that Indigenous peoples have the right to free, prior and informed consent before the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources. States Parties are encouraged to use human rights-based approaches, and to seek the free, prior and informed consent of rights-holders where appropriate. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 12, 14bis, 39, 119 ➜ UNESCO 2018 Policy on Engaging with Indigenous Peoples 8 PRINCIPLES 2 8. Impact assessment should identify a range of reasonable alternatives, and assess their potential impacts. Impact assessment should consider both the negative and positive impacts of a proposed action, along with any alternatives, in order to establish the most sustainable option that both protects the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage properties and achieves the objectives of the proposed action. These may include alternative locations, scales, processes, site layouts, operating conditions, etc. It is important that the option not to proceed is included. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 118bis 9. Impact assessment should evaluate broader trends and cumulative impacts. A proposed action should be assessed within its larger context and not in isolation. Multiple projects of the same type, or a combination of different projects over time, may cause cumulative impacts which compound the impacts of an individual proposed action. Other factors, including climate change, may also make a World Heritage property vulnerable and amplify the impacts of a proposed action. The assessment therefore needs to consider other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future actions that could affect a World Heritage property. Having considered specific impacts in detail, the assessments should also include a final analysis of all potential impacts together. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 111d, 112 10. Impact assessment is an iterative, not a linear, process. Many steps of impact assessment need to be informed by the results of other steps, and updated if necessary. For example, having assessed a proposed action’s potential negative impacts and identified possible mitigation measures, the impacts will need to be reassessed to ensure that the heritage/ conservation values remain safeguarded by the mitigation measures adopted. Similarly, the results of public consultation on a draft scoping report may lead to the reconsideration of alternatives. ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 111c, d 11. Impact assessment processes should be embedded in the management system of the World Heritage property. The impact assessment’s recommendations should inform management decisions, and in turn can draw on existing management frameworks and processes (e.g. the Statement of Outstanding Universal Value, identification of other heritage/conservation values, mapping of attributes, data collection). In a cyclical process, this can contribute to better management, monitoring, risk mitigation and feedback to improve future impact assessments. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT ➜ Operational Guidelines para. 108, 110 9 3. THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT This section provides an overview of the World Heritage system: the World Heritage Convention; World Heritage properties and their values and attributes; World Heritage governance and management; and links to sustainable development. 3.1 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION The UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage1 – the World Heritage Convention – recognizes the importance of both natural and cultural heritage properties, as well as the imperative to protect and conserve them in a rapidly changing world. While States Parties pledge to conserve all heritage within their territories, the best-known element of the Convention is the World Heritage List of those natural and cultural heritage places that are considered to be of ‘Outstanding Universal Value’. To be included on the List, properties must meet at least one of ten criteria of Outstanding Universal Value (Box 3.1), along with requirements for authenticity, integrity, and protection and management (see Box 3.2).2 There are many different kinds of World Heritage properties, both natural and cultural: places where geological features or processes can be seen, natural and cultural landscapes, ecosystems and natural habitats, architectural complexes, human settlements, archaeological sites, industrial heritage, sacred places, heritage routes and many others. They may also have associated intangible attributes, such as important spiritual practices or related cultural traditions, which are reflected in physical elements of the property. The wide variety of heritage around the world means that the impacts which can affect World Heritage properties are equally diverse. For example: upstream drainage works that affect water levels at a freshwater site; large buildings that affect views in and out of a World Heritage property; incremental changes to an urban layout that was representative of a historical period; blockage of a migration route for an important species; or any development on a site whose pristine characteristics are central to an important cultural tradition. Impact assessment is a key tool for identifying, avoiding and minimizing such negative impacts. The World Heritage Convention established a World Heritage Committee, an intergovernmental body composed of States Parties which maintains the World Heritage List. The Convention is also supported by a Secretariat within UNESCO, known as the UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Three international GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS organizations are named as Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee in Article 8.3 of the Convention: ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN. The World Heritage Committee meets annually to oversee and guide the implementation of the Convention. This includes deciding which properties are inscribed on, or deleted from the World Heritage List. The Committee also examines reports on the state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List and may request States Parties to take action when a specific issue affects a property – this can include a request for an impact assessment. Indeed, Committee Decision 39 COM 7 underlined the benefit to States Parties of using impact assessments to manage continuity and change, and encouraged them to integrate impact assessment processes into legislation, planning mechanisms and management planning. 1. https://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ 2. If States Parties intend to put forward a World Heritage nomination in the future, they may place heritage sites on a Tentative List. The principles and methodology of this Guidance can also help to protect and manage heritage at Tentative List properties. 10 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 Box 3.1. Criteria for Outstanding Universal Value The property should: i. represent a masterpiece of human creative genius; ii. exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design; iii. bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared; iv. be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; v. be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change; vi. be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria); vii. contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance; viii. be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth’s history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features; ix. be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals; and/or x. contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of Outstanding Universal Value from the point of view of science or conservation. Source: UNESCO, 2021. Box 3.2 Authenticity, integrity, protection and management Authenticity applies to cultural heritage, and refers to the degree to which knowledge and understanding of the property’s heritage values are understood and believed to be credible: whether their cultural values are truthfully and credibly expressed through attributes including form and design; materials and substance; use and function; traditions, techniques and management systems; location and setting; language and other forms of intangible heritage; spirit and feeling; and other internal and external factors. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT Integrity is a measure of the wholeness and intactness of the natural and/or cultural heritage and its attributes: the extent to which the property includes all elements necessary to express its Outstanding Universal Value; whether it is of adequate size to ensure the complete representation of the features and processes which convey the property’s significance; and whether it has been protected from adverse effects of development and/or neglect. Protection and management relates to how a property’s Outstanding Universal Value, including its integrity and/or authenticity, are sustained and enhanced over time. Source: UNESCO, 2021. 11 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 3.2 WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTIES 3.2.1 OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE Being included on the World Heritage List means that a heritage place has been formally recognized as having ‘Outstanding Universal Value’ (OUV). The concept of OUV, together with the conditions for its authenticity and integrity, underpins the World Heritage Convention, and all activities associated with properties on the List, including impact assessment (Figure 3.1). Each property on the List has a Statement of Outstanding Universal Value which summarizes the justification for the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List, and serves as a baseline for the universally recognized and accepted heritage/conservation values of that place. These statements can be found on the UNESCO World Heritage Centre’s website along with other relevant documents, such as the nomination file, management plans, and mission reports, among others. Outstanding Universal Value Meets Protection & criteria Integrity & management authenticity Figure 3.1. The ‘three pillars’ of Outstanding Universal Value. 3.2.2. VALUES AND ATTRIBUTES The Statement of Outstanding Universal Value includes a description of the values and attributes of the World Heritage property for which it was inscribed on the World Heritage List. The OUV, including its authenticity and integrity, must continue to remain protected for any property on the World Heritage List. These concepts are important for carrying out impact assessment in a World Heritage context. Values are what makes a heritage place special, and a particular combination of heritage/conservation values will explain why one specific place is of particular importance. In the case of a World Heritage GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT property, the value that is considered to be ‘of importance for present and future generations of all humanity’ is its OUV (see Box 3.3 for an example). A World Heritage property may also have other heritage/conservation values that need to be considered in impact assessment, for instance, those that underpin national and local heritage designations, and/or the values held by of Indigenous peoples and associated communities. These may be formally designated or informally recognized. Attributes are the elements of a heritage place that convey its values and makes them understandable. They can be physical qualities, relating to the material fabric and other tangible features, but can also be intangible aspects such as processes, social arrangements or cultural practices, as well as associations and relationships which are reflected in physical elements of the property. 12 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 For cultural heritage places, attributes can be buildings or other built structures and their forms, materials, design, uses and functions but also urban layouts, agricultural processes, religious ceremonies, building techniques, visual relationships and spiritual connections. For natural properties, attributes can be specific landscape features, areas of habitat, flagship species, aspects relating to environmental quality (such as intactness, high/pristine environmental quality), scale and naturalness of habitats, and size and viability of wildlife populations. Attributes may extend over vast areas and may depend on processes occurring outside a World Heritage property. Attributes, and the interactions between them, should be the focus of protection, conservation and management actions. The term ‘attributes’ is particularly used for World Heritage properties to describe how Outstanding Universal Value is identified and conveyed, and a clear understanding of the attributes that convey a property’s Outstanding Universal Value is critical for their long-term protection. The spatial distribution of those attributes and their respective protection requirements should inform the boundary of the property, its buffer zone and other management actions. The term ‘attribute’ is particularly used for World Heritage properties to describe how Outstanding Universal Value is identified and conveyed (see Box 3.3). Box 3.3. Example of a Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (extract) Blue Sea Marine Park and the Old Town of Heritopolis The property is located in an ecologically and globally outstanding region, the Blue Sea. The property covers 400,000 ha with a buffer zone of 600,000 ha comprising both marine and terrestrial areas. It is part of a larger transition area between northern and southern biogeographic zones and its marine systems have developed unique and different ecosystems and species, including endangered ecological communities. The largely undisturbed habitats include rare examples of tropical coral reef systems and unique soft coral species. The property and its surrounding area also include seagrass beds and mangrove habitats. These habitats are home to populations of seabirds, marine mammals, fish, corals, sharks, manta rays and marine turtles, and the site provides important feeding grounds for the last remaining healthy population of endangered orange dugong. BSMP is an important larvae source area and hosts spawning sites for commercial fish species… Located on the Blue Sea coast, the historic port town of Heritopolis has played a role throughout history as a place of interchange between historic cultures over time. While much of the architecture reflects the city’s golden age of wealth as a trading port in the 18th century, the buildings respect the much older urban layout that dates back to the 6th century. The 18th-century urban plan placed equal emphasis on the built fabric as on public green spaces within the city centre. In addition, within the urban fabric are a range of significant monuments from each stage of the city’s history: the GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT Mausoleum of Eugenius, the Basilica of St Helena and the Great Mosque with its madrasa and baths, are all important architectural masterpieces of different periods. The eclectic mix of vernacular and monumental architecture reflects the diverse communities who have lived in the city for one and a half millennia and who continue to follow traditional practices today… Source: World Heritage Leadership Note: In this extract, the values have been underlined (values: why is this heritage place special?) and attributes are in italics (attributes: how can we see those values if we visit the place?) 13 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 National and local values are also conveyed by attributes that may contribute to protect the conditions of authenticity and integrity of World Heritage properties. The relationship between attributes and values can be complex – one attribute might convey several values, and one value might be conveyed by multiple attributes. For this reason, although it is helpful to identify the OUV, national and local values and attributes, impact assessment should recognize that together they form an interconnected system and that a proposed action might impact as a whole. 3.2.3. BOUNDARIES, BUFFER ZONES AND THE WIDER SETTING A World Heritage property is defined by a boundary, and ideally all the attributes of OUV will be located within that boundary. In most cases, a World Heritage property should also be surrounded by a formally recognized World Heritage buffer zone(s) which supports the protection of the property’s OUV and attributes, e.g. by providing visual access to the sky behind a significant skyline, or by connecting components of a World Heritage property. Buffer zones have complementary legal restrictions placed on their use and development to provide an added layer of protection to the World Heritage property. Maps illustrating both boundaries and buffer zones can be found on the World Heritage website and they are a requirement for the successful submission of a nomination. Depending on the country, different legal, policy and management frameworks will apply to the property and buffer zone. Every World Heritage property is surrounded by a wider setting, which is the immediate and extended environment that is part of, or contributes to, its significance and distinctive character. It may relate to the property’s topography, natural and built environment, and other elements such as infrastructure, land use patterns, spatial organization and visual relationships. It may include related ecological and hydrological connectivity, social and cultural practices, economic processes and other intangible dimensions of heritage such as perceptions and associations. The wider setting might also play an essential role in protecting the authenticity and integrity of the property, and its management is related to its role in supporting the Outstanding Universal Value.3 While buffer zones typically cover the immediate area around the World Heritage property, the wider setting may be unprotected or protected by different legislation. This can lead to the risk that a proposed action is planned for the wider setting without considering the potential impacts on the World Heritage property. The wider setting of the property may be shown on a map, but in many cases will need to be identified as part of the impact assessment scoping process. The wider setting may be small or indeed limited to the buffer zone, for example where views are limited for a property whose OUV relates to its architecture; or large, for instance where extensive wildlife corridors are needed to provide a migration route for animals that contribute to the property’s OUV (see Figure 3.2). Due to the relationship between a World Heritage property and its wider setting, some proposed actions might have an impact on OUV. Hence, it is important that impact assessment looks at the wider setting of the World Heritage property. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT 3. Partially adapted from: https://www.icomos.org/charters/xian-declaration.pdf 14 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 World Heritage property WH buffer zone World Heritage property WH buffer zone Wider setting Figure 3.2. Example of World Heritage property (orange), its buffer zone (grey) and interdependency on its wider setting (yellow) 3.3 WORLD HERITAGE MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE AS A FOUNDATION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT 3.3.1. MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE The procedures for managing properties inscribed on the World Heritage List are set out in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.4 Each State Party has a national authority with a designated National Focal Point to help implement the Convention at the state level. The GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT governance arrangements for properties vary, although a site manager or management team is usually responsible for an individual World Heritage property. The UNESCO World Heritage Centre can provide contact details for National Focal Points and site managers and provides further information and guidance about the management of natural and cultural World Heritage properties on its website. 3.3.2. PROCESS FOR REQUESTING AN IMPACT ASSESSMENT The National Focal Point is usually responsible for informing the UNESCO World Heritage Centre about proposed actions that may affect a property before any irreversible decisions are taken, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines. Site management teams may also draw attention to such actions, identifying the need to notify the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and carry out an impact assessment. Civil society representatives and other groups concerned about impacts on World Heritage properties may 4. Published by UNESCO since 1977. Latest revision at the time of writing this document: 2021. https://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/ 15 THE WORLD HERITAGE CONTEXT FOR IMPACT 3 also contact the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, in line with Paragraph 174 of the Operational Guidelines. In response, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre may request additional information on the proposed action from the State Party, including any impact assessments carried out before actions are taken. The Centre reviews this information in close collaboration with the Advisory Bodies and, if the situation at a World Heritage property warrants the attention of the World Heritage Committee, they will put forward a report on the state of conservation of a property at the Committee’s next session. Upon reviewing the case, the Committee may also request an impact assessment, recommend that revisions be made to an existing impact assessment or take a position on the proposed action. If the Committee requests an impact assessment, it is the State Party’s responsibility to ensure that it is carried out and submitted for review, as requested by the Committee following the current Guidance. Carrying out an impact assessment is generally easier and more effective where there is a robust management system with effective governance measures – data collection is more straightforward, public input is more easily facilitated, and impacts are easier to monitor and manage. However, even if a World Heritage property does not have a well-functioning management system, impact assessment can help to improve proposed actions. For example, the baseline information collected through the impact assessment process can be used for other management purposes; it can act as a catalyst for stakeholders to come together and promote more participatory decision-making; and it can help to define what type of proposed actions are appropriate for the World Heritage property. 3.4 INTEGRATING A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE INTO THE PROCESSES OF THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION UNESCO’s Policy for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention (2015) explains how World Heritage properties can contribute to the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2015) (see Box 3.4). The policy reinforces the requirement to protect Outstanding Universal Value while also considering the dimensions of sustainable development (environmental sustainability, inclusive social development and inclusive economic development), together with peace and security. These dimensions are interdependent and mutually reinforcing: none should have priority, and they should work together to achieve their individual objectives. This dual approach also applies to impact assessment in a World Heritage context – States Parties should take a proactive approach to managing World Heritage and protecting OUV, which includes working towards sustainable development. Box 3.4 Policy on the integration of a sustainable development perspective into the processes of the World Heritage Convention (extract) By identifying, protecting, conserving, presenting and transmitting to present and future generations GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT irreplaceable cultural and natural heritage properties of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), the World Heritage Convention, in itself, contributes significantly to sustainable development and the wellbeing of people. At the same time, strengthening the three dimensions of sustainable development that are environmental sustainability, inclusive social development, and inclusive economic development, as well as the fostering of peace and security, may bring benefits to World Heritage properties and support their OUV, if carefully integrated within their conservation and management systems. In addition to protecting the OUV of World Heritage properties, States Parties should, therefore, recognise and promote the properties’ inherent potential to contribute to all dimensions of sustainable development and work to harness the collective benefits for society, by ensuring that their conservation and management strategies are aligned with broader sustainable development objectives. In this process, the properties’ OUV should not be compromised. Source: UNESCO, 2015, paras 3 and 4. 16 4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE This section provides an overview of impact assessment and how it can be carried out for World Heritage properties. It addresses cases where an impact assessment is mandatory within a national or other framework and World Heritage considerations also need to be included. 4.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Impact assessment5 has been described as ‘thinking before acting’ (Morrison-Saunders, 2018). It informs the decision-making process by exploring consequences that proposed actions may have on the environment, or in the case of World Heritage properties, on their OUV. It should always be carried out before any irreversible decisions or actions are taken, so that any findings can genuinely inform a final decision. This ensures the best outcomes for the world’s most exceptional places and for society, both today and in the future. There are multiple stages in the development and implementation of a proposed action (Figure 4.1). An impact assessment needs to take place early enough to be able to influence planning: the later an impact assessment takes place, the less potential it has to influence the outcome. The final impact assessment report needs to be ready in time to help inform the decision on whether the proposed action should proceed, be modified or not be carried out at all – before construction or any other preparatory actions on the ground take place.6 ESIA/HIA PROCESS recommendations Ability to influence REPORT Accuracy of assessment CONCEPT PLANNING CONSTRUCTION OPERATION DECOMMISSIONING RECOVERY decision GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS Figure 4.1. Development and implementation of a proposed action. An impact assessment needs to take place at an appropriate point in the lifecycle of a proposed action so that it can influence that planning process and inform decision-making. Note: depending on the type of the proposed action, the ‘construction’ phase might instead involve other forms of preparations; while the ‘operation’ phase could be any longer-term implementation and running of the proposed action. Impact assessment has been used since the 1970s and is now a well-established system in nearly all countries. Nowadays, many international finance institutions and major commercial banks require borrowers to show that they are safeguarding the natural and cultural heritage as a prerequisite to any lending – impact assessment can help with this. By the 1980s, the World Heritage Committee’s Advisory Bodies had begun to highlight how impact assessment could be used in a World Heritage context; over the last decade, the World Heritage Committee has requested impact assessments for more than 200 World Heritage properties. 5. D ifferent terms may be used for this depending on the country’s legal system, e.g. ‘environmental impact assessment’, ‘environmental statement’. 6. Further introductory information on impact assessment can be found at IAIA (1999, 2009), Glasson and Therivel (2019) and Morrison-Saunders (2018). 17 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 4.1.1 THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCESS Impact assessment should start early in the development of a proposed action, and inform the entire planning process. The assessment itself consists of a series of 11 steps (Table 4.1) which are flexible and can be adapted to the type and location of the action being proposed. Impact assessment is normally carried out by an independent team of specialists, who are commissioned to inform: i) the proponent’s planning of the proposed action ii) the relevant authority’s decision on whether the proposed action should be permitted. Impact assessment should also include an important component of participation by rights-holders and other stakeholders, including environmental and heritage authorities and communities. Unlike other impact assessment guidance documents, this Guidance advocates that participation of rights-holders and stakeholders, and proactive problem solving should take place throughout the entire impact assessment process. This is because of the importance of involving rights-holders and other stakeholders in the protection and management of World Heritage properties, and because a fundamental purpose of impact assessment is to consider alternatives and mitigation to impacts on their Outstanding Universal Value. Table 4.1. Overview of the impact assessment process Prompt questions for generic impact assessment (in italics, additional prompt questions when considering impacts on World Heritage) Throughout the impact assessment A. Participation Who are the rights-holders and other relevant stakeholders? How should rights-holders and other stakeholders be engaged? Are there consent issues to be considered (e.g. free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous peoples and possibly others)? What engagement methods should be used for different groups, including those who have traditionally been disenfranchised? B. P roactive Is the proposed action necessary? Is it preferable to ‘do nothing’? problem What are the alternatives to the proposed action? solving What would be the preferred or most environmentally benign option for achieving the proposal’s objectives? GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT How can any negative impacts of the proposed action be avoided or minimized? How can these impacts be avoided/minimized for OUV and its attributes? Are there opportunities to provide or enhance any positive impacts of the proposed action? To enhance the management of OUV? Steps of impact assessment 1. Screening Is an impact assessment needed? What are the property’s OUV and other heritage/conservation values? What are the property’s attributes? Is the proposed action compatible with the OUV of a World Heritage property? Could the proposed action have an impact on OUV regardless of its location? 2. Scoping What data, impacts, geographical area and time period should the impact assessment cover? What should be the terms of reference for the impact assessment? What essential information is needed, and is it available? If not, is a valid assessment feasible based on existing information sources? (See also ‘A. Participation’ above) 18 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 Table 4.1. Overview of the impact assessment process (cont.) Prompt questions for generic impact assessment (in italics, additional prompt questions when considering impacts on World Heritage) Steps of impact assessment 3. Baseline What are the current conditions? How would the baseline change in the future in the absence of the proposed action? What are the current conditions of the World Heritage property and the attributes that support its OUV and other heritage/conservation values? How is the property managed? What was the property’s state of conservation at the time of inscription? 4. The proposed What is being proposed (plans, description, visualizations etc.)? action and How would it be implemented? alternatives Is there enough information to assess the proposed action? What are reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that would avoid or reduce any negative impacts and still achieve the objectives of the proposed action? (See also ‘A. Participation’ and ‘B. Proactive problem solving’ above) 5. Identifying What environmental, social and other related impacts would result from the proposed and predicting action and any alternatives? impacts What changes to OUV and other heritage/conservation values would occur as a result of the proposed action, both positive and negative? 6. Evaluating How significant are the impacts of the proposed action and any alternatives? impacts How significant are the impacts to the OUV and other heritage/conservation values, given the international importance of World Heritage? 7. Mitigation What are reasonable alternatives to the proposed action that avoid or reduce any and negative impacts and achieve the objectives of the proposed action? enhancement What mitigation measures are necessary to avoid or minimize any predicted negative impacts? What are the positive impacts? Can they be enhanced? Can negative impacts on the OUV and other heritage/conservation values be avoided? If negative impacts cannot be fully avoided, how can they be minimized to a level that they are no longer of concern? How significant are the residual (post-mitigation) impacts? (See also ‘A. Participation’ and ‘B. Proactive problem solving’ above) 8. Reporting How should the process and conclusions of the impact assessment be communicated? 9. Reviewing the Does the report meet its terms of reference? report Is it ‘fit for purpose’ for decision-making? (See also ‘A. Participation’ above) 10. Decision- Is the proposed action the best possible, given identified alternatives? GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT making Should the proposed action be given approval? If so, under what terms or conditions (mitigation measures)? (See also ‘B. Proactive problem solving’ above) 11. Follow-up How should the mitigation measures be implemented? What should be done to monitor and manage the proposed action and by whom? 19 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 4.2 TYPES OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT Broadly speaking, there are two main types of impact assessment that can be carried out at different scales, depending on the nature of the proposed action, and can focus on specific issues, including heritage: Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA); if the assessment focuses on heritage it may i) be called a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA). ii) Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), also known as an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), refers to an assessment of the impacts of a specific proposed action at a project level. The assessment is normally carried out on larger projects, with significant potential environmental impacts, but in some cases can cover small-scale projects at sensitive locations. Almost every country in the world has an existing ESIA system that aims to protect the both the natural, as well as the cultural, environment. Large multilateral financial institutions, such as development banks, typically require an impact assessment – including an assessment of impacts on natural and cultural heritage – for particular kinds of projects.7 Indeed, many international banks that have signed the Equator Principles8 now include impact assessment as a standard planning tool and use it to screen proposed actions. ESIAs often include assessment of impacts on heritage, as well as other environmental and social considerations. Section 5 of this Guidance explains how World Heritage and OUV should be considered as part of a wider ESIA. Heritage impact assessments are project-specific assessments that focus on the potential effect on a heritage place’s OUV and other heritage/conservation values. In the context of World Heritage properties, a Heritage Impact Assessment should focus on identifying and assessing negative and positive impacts on the attributes which convey the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property. Section 6 discusses how to consider World Heritage issues as part of such an assessment. In addition to an ESIA, a growing number of countries also require impact assessment of the preceding policies, plans and/or programmes that set the context for individual projects – this is referred to as a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). By proactively considering heritage issues early in the planning process, SEA can inform better decision-making when projects are being considered. SEA is also better suited than ESIA to assessing the cumulative impacts of multiple projects at a landscape/regional scale (including those that do not require ESIA); and at setting strategic and generic mitigation measures that can apply consistently to all projects. Figure 4.2 summarizes the main differences between ESIA and SEA.9 GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT In impact assessment the word ‘environment’ includes physical, biological, resource use, social, cultural, health, and economic dimensions, so it can be applied equally to both natural and cultural World Heritage. 7. For example, see the International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standard 8: Cultural Heritage (IFC, 2012) 8. https://equator-principles.com/ 9. Further information on SEA can be found in OECD-DAC (2006) and UNECE (2012). 20 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 PROPOSED PROJECT(S) Framework for future Assessment of formalized development proposal (prepares for) (responds to) SEA ESIA/HIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Strategic Environmental Assessment Heritage Impact Assessment Applies to Policies, plans and/or programmes (‘strategic actions’) Projects with significant environmental impacts Carried out by Usually a planning authority (public), usually via a consultant Project proponent (public or private), usually via a consultant Links to decision-making Informs decisions on policy/plan/programme development Informs decisions on project permitting/licensing Scope of applicability More limited requirements worldwide: e.g. required for plans and Required in most jurisdictions; also by most multilateral financial programmes but not policies in European Union countries institutions (ESIA only) General approach More strategic, proactive, political, broad-brush More reactive, technical, specific, detailed Alternatives Considers potentially greater number of strategic alternatives: Considers limited number of specific alternatives: where, how why, how, where Impact identification Identifies more general environmental/sustainability implications of Identifies specific impacts of the proposed project the proposed policy/plan/programme Cumulative impacts Focuses on whether thresholds/standards are exceeded Assesses impacts of other projects jointly with project impacts Mitigation Aims to set generic mitigation measures applicable to all projects Aims to avoid/minimize impacts of the project arising from the policy/plan/programme, with a focus on achieving sustainability objectives Figure 4.2. The difference between SEA and ESIA. Source: Content adapted from CSIR, 1996; World Heritage Leadership. As Figure 4.2 shows, SEA can provide a context and framework for considering individual projects and their ESIAs. SEA and ESIA are complementary processes that can be applied at the same World Heritage property when appropriate, and on multiple occasions. SEA has the advantage of being more proactive and strategic, and can consider issues on a larger landscape scale, potentially reducing external pressure on World Heritage and supporting decision-making before any specific projects are proposed. ESIA can then help understand a specific proposed action in detail and ensure there are no potential negative impacts on Outstanding Universal Value. For example, an SEA for a regional or national transport network can provide a framework for the impact assessments of individual transport projects by identifying environmental constraints, preferred alternatives, and likely cumulative impacts. It can also set conditions (‘mitigation measures’) for subsequent projects that help to protect valued assets, including heritage. However, the SEA will not remove the need to undertake ESIAs for the individual transport projects. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT The principles and overall approaches outlined in this Guidance are relevant to SEA and a future guidance document will be prepared to address SEA in more detail. Finally, the various national, regional and international standards developed by the finance sector should be noted.10 All forms of impact assessment should meet these as minimum requirements and, in a World Heritage context, assessments should aim to reach the most exemplary standards. 10. See World Bank (2018); OECD-DAC (2006); and IFC (2012). 21 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 4.3 ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE Assessment of impacts on World Heritage involves determining whether the proposed action would affect the property’s Outstanding Universal Value and other heritage/conservation values (see Section 3.2). As a proposed action should not be detrimental to a property’s OUV, the focus of the assessment should change from ‘What is the impact of this project/plan?’ to ‘What is its impact on OUV?’ This requires an understanding of the attributes that contribute to the OUV of the World Heritage property and its other heritage/conservation values, within its boundary, buffer and wider setting, which may then mean that the scope of the assessment should be extended to include the relevant geographical, ecological and landscape areas around the heritage, while also considering the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts (Figure 4.3). Changes in/impacts on... Habitat Connectivity/fragmentation Transport wider setting Outstanding Other heritage Use patterns Attributes Universal and conservation Value values Local employment Etc. So need to understand Figure 4.3. Identifying wider changes that could affect OUV. Changes to the wider setting can affect the OUV of a World Heritage property, other heritage/conservation values, and attributes. The scoping stage should identify those wider changes that could affect OUV and include them in the impact assessment to consider all direct, indirect and cumulative impacts. 4.4 DETERMINING THE TYPE OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT NEEDED Where a proposed action has the potential to affect a World Heritage property’s Outstanding Universal Value and other heritage/conservation values, either alone or jointly with other actions (‘cumulative impact’), then an assessment of the action’s effects on the OUV and other values should be carried GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT out before the action can go ahead. It is the shared responsibility of the National Focal Point, site management and relevant consent authorities of the State Party to ensure that the appropriate form of impact assessment is carried out, normally paid for by the project proponent. 22 IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR WORLD HERITAGE 4 World Heritage management authorities must understand the applicable impact assessment legislation and system of operation within their jurisdiction,11 so that the right form of impact assessment is carried out. If a formal assessment of the proposed action’s impacts on the heritage would already be required as part of local/national frameworks or donor requirements, then the assessment of OUV can and should be integrated into this wider impact assessment (see Section 5). Alternatively, for countries where impact assessment is not required, or where the action would not come under existing impact assessment requirements, a stand-alone assessment of impacts on OUV and other heritage/conservation values should be carried out (see Section 6). Figure 4.4 summarizes the process of determining what kind of impact assessment is needed. Could the proposed action have any negative impact, alone or jointly with other actions, on the Q1 OUV or other heritage/conservation values of a NO A No need for impact assessment related to the World Heritage property’s OUV or other World Heritage property? heritage/conservation values YES Does the proposed action require impact Carry out a free-standing Heritage Impact Assessment on Q2 assessment under existing country or donor requirements? NO B the World Heritage property’s OUV and other heritage/conservation values (see Section 6) YES Does the country or donor require NO Q3 an assessment of impacts on heritage? Assess impacts on the World Heritage property’s OUV and other heritage/conservation values as part of the assessment of a broader ESIA YES C (see Section 5) Figure 4.4. Indicative flowchart for determining the type of impact assessment needed for actions potentially affecting World Heritage properties. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT 11. W here a proposed action in one country could have a significant effect on a World Heritage property in another country, both countries’ legislations and operating systems may apply. 23 5. ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE AS PART OF A WIDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT For many years, the World Heritage Committee has requested impact assessments to understand the consequences of proposed actions in or near World Heritage properties, and there is a great deal of professional expertise and guidance in this field. However, concerns have been raised about the rigour of these assessments on properties’ Outstanding Universal Value. A thorough understanding of OUV and other heritage/conservation values, and of the attributes that convey OUV, is crucial to conducting impact assessment for World Heritage. Using the process outlined in Table 4.1, this section explains how a wider impact assessment should address World Heritage in order to meet the requirements of the World Heritage Convention. Process of assessing the potential impacts of a proposed action 1 2 334 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A. Participation B. Proactive problem solving 1. Screening 3. Baseline assessment 9. Reviewing the report 2. Scoping 4. Proposed action and alternatives 10. Decision-making 5. Identifying and predicting potential impacts 11. Follow up 6. Evaluating impacts 7. Mitigation and enhancement 8. Reporting Carried out by: State Party Carried out by: Carried out by: State Party (through relevant institutions) impact assessment team (through relevant institutions) Figure 5.1. The process of an impact assessment conducted for World Heritage. A. Participation. Local communities, along with environmental and heritage authorities, should be involved as early as possible during World Heritage decision-making and impact assessment processes, so that their views can be heard and they can have a meaningful influence on the process. A human rights-based approach GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENTS should be used – for example, if the impact assessment process would not normally include this kind of participation, it should do so to meet the requirements of the World Heritage Convention. Additionally, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that Indigenous peoples have the right to free, prior and informed consent prior to approval of any project affecting their lands, territories or other resources: this approach should be used for Indigenous peoples and should be considered for all local residents. The UNESCO Declarations, Conventions and Recommendations, including the 1972 Convention, contain important provisions regarding human rights, participation, community stewardship and customary practices governing access to culture and benefit sharing. The active involvement of local communities, Indigenous peoples and other rights-holders in all aspects of cultural and heritage life is also guided by the 2018 UNESCO Policy on Engaging with Indigenous Peoples. ➜ See also sections 2 and 6.2. 24 ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE AS PART OF A WIDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5 B. Proactive problem solving involves considering the proposed action throughout its development, to determine whether it is needed, whether an alternative approach would be more sustainable, whether any negative impacts could be avoided or minimized, and whether any positive impacts could be produced or enhanced. ➜ See also section 6.3. 1. Screening: World Heritage properties are of international importance and should always be considered as sensitive and valued. In cases where a proposed action may affect a World Heritage property – either directly, indirectly or cumulatively with other actions – an impact assessment on the property and its OUV should be carried out. This applies even if the proposed action would have no other impact. The proponent should prepare a brief screening report based on existing information, which includes: i. The World Heritage property’s name and a map showing its boundary, buffer zone and (where appropriate) wider setting, as adopted by the World Heritage Committee12 ii. The World Heritage property’s Statement of Outstanding Universal Value iii. The attributes that contribute to the OUV of the World Heritage property iv. Other heritage/conservation values of the property v. For each attribute or value, a preliminary assessment as to whether the proposed action will significantly affect that attribute or value. Further information on these points will be collected and documented at the baseline assessment stage. Tool 1 provides more information on identifying values and attributes, and Tool 2 provides guidance on identifying impacts. This will give the proponent an early indication of whether the action can go ahead and, if so, what measures might be required to protect the OUV. Mineral, oil and gas exploration or development is in all cases incompatible with World Heritage status. A number of industry leaders have adopted a ‘no go commitment’ not to explore or exploit for oil, gas or minerals in World Heritage properties, and ensure activities outside World Heritage properties do not negatively affect the OUV. As the Secretariat of the World Heritage Convention, the UNESCO World Heritage Centre may ask a State Party to provide an impact assessment for a specific project or action, for example after being notified of a proposed or ongoing action, in line with Paragraph 172 or 174 of the Operational Guidelines. The World Heritage Committee may also request a State Party to carry out an impact assessment, notably upon reviewing a report on the state of conservation of a property and/or the outcomes of a Reactive Monitoring mission. If the Committee requests an impact assessment, for the State has the duty to provide this assessment in the timeframe required by the Committee. GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT In case of uncertainty, States Parties should contact the UNESCO World Heritage Centre early, to ensure that an activity that might negatively impact a World Heritage property’s OUV does not proceed. This can also help the proponent to better understand any concerns related to World Heritage and enable them to adjust the preliminary proposal before the formal screening steps of impact assessment. ➜ See also sections 3.3 and 6.4. 12. A s adopted by the World Heritage Committee either at the time of inscription or after any subsequent boundary clarification or modification (including extensions). All statutory information, including the cartographic information and associated decisions, is publicly accessible on the UNESCO World Heritage Centre’s website. 25 ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE AS PART OF A WIDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5 2. Scoping: The process used to prepare the screening report in Step 1. will inform the scope of the assessment: the geographical boundary of the assessment (Figure 5.1), the topics analysed, and any possible alternatives. Appendix 1.1 provides a scoping checklist. Consideration should be given to what information is available and, should essential information not be currently available, a decision needs to be made if a valid assessment is feasible based on existing information sources. The scope of the assessment may go considerably beyond what might usually be assessed in order to fully address the World Heritage property’s OUV. ➜ See also section 6.5. 3. Baseline assessment: In addition to the standard description of heritage assets, the impact assessment baseline should discuss the World Heritage property’s OUV, other heritage/conservation values, attributes, boundary, buffer zone and wider setting. The identification and breakdown of OUV and attributes should be included in the management planning documents for the World Heritage property, to provide the baseline for all management actions. However, in the case that these are not readily available, this can be done through the use of Tool 1. Although the baseline assessment concerns the current situation, it may be useful to revisit the condition of a World Heritage property at the time of its inscription, so that subsequent changes to OUV and the property’s state of conservation can be measured and potential vulnerabilities identified. It will also be necessary to consider likely future changes without the proposed action, such as other planned projects, emerging plans, and national or regional trends (e.g. improving air quality, worsening traffic, climate change). This can include a discussion of changes and threats that are less likely, but which would have a significant impact on the World Heritage property and its OUV, e.g. flooding, conflict, population displacement or landslides. This discussion of potential future change is particularly useful for identifying and evaluating cumulative impacts, showing where the effects of a proposed action may be more significant due to its connection to other actions in the past, present and foreseeable future. ➜ See also section 6.6. rZ Buffe one Wider Setting WH Action GUIDANCE AND TOOLKIT FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT Area of influence of action Figure 5.2. Area of influence of a proposed action in relation to the attributes of the World Heritage property. A proposed action can have an impact on OUV even when it is not located within a World Heritage property or its buffer zone. If that is the case it will still need to be assessed. It is also important to be aware of the interdependencies between a World Heritage property and its buffer zone and wider setting. 26 ASSESSING IMPACTS ON WORLD HERITAGE AS PART OF A WIDER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5 4. The proposed action and alterna

Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue