Carlos Perez Marin

   The process to qualify for one of the classifications established by UNESCO is complex and is not only about meeting some of the criteria indicated above, it also involves geostrategic and diplomatic interests. Although it is not a written rule, an equitable territorial distribution is attempted by avoiding regions or autonomous communities with a greater number or density of declarations. In the same way that UNESCO encourages countries without protected elements, or with a reduced number of them, to present candidacies, privileging these cases over countries with a greater density of declarations.

   The Tentative List. This list is an inventory of assets that each country consider to be cultural heritage of outstanding universal value and therefore suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List. and is the first step to achieving said declaration.

   The presentation of a Tentative List is done by completing a standard form that contains the name of the assets, their geographical location, a brief description of them, a comparison with other similar assets, a justification of their outstanding universal value and a brief statement of authenticity and/or integrity. In the Spanish Tentative List there are currently 31 proposed sites and the process according to the Ministry of Culture would be as follows.

   Each autonomous community selects the assets in its region that may be declared World Heritage in the future.

   This selection is presented to World Heritage Working Group I, created in 2010 by the Ministry of Culture and endorsed by the Historical Heritage Council. This group is made up of representatives of the ministry and representatives of the heritage areas of all the autonomous communities. It addresses in a technical way the study of new proposals to integrate the Spanish Tentative List to obtain the best results through quality proposals that are in line with the Global Strategy.

   The autonomous community presents to the Historical Heritage Council the assets that may be incorporated into the Tentative List and the recommendation of the technical report of the working group.

   The plenary session of the Historical Heritage Council approves the inclusions in the Spanish Tentative List.

   The ministry transmits it to the World Heritage Center which, if the necessary requirements are met, submits it to the World Heritage Committee for evaluation.

   Timeline for inscribing an asset on the World Heritage list

01 Beginning of process. The autonomous community (or autonomous communities, if applicable) presents its first draft proposal for candidacy to the Spanish Tentative List before the ministry. This draft corresponds to Annex 2 of the Operational Guidelines of the World Heritage Convention.

02 The ministry presents the proposal to Group I of World Heritage. The group will make its comments and contributions following the criteria agreed by the Historical Heritage Council for the Tentative List.

03 The ministry sends the proposal that incorporates the technical annotations made in World Heritage Working Group I to the autonomous community for review.

04 The autonomous community presents the proposal for candidacy for the Spanish Tentative List before the Historical Heritage Council for evaluation.

05 Registration on the Tentative List.

06 The ministry transmits the proposal to the World Heritage Center which, as permanent secretary of the committee, presents it to the World Heritage Committee (June) for approval. Once approved by the committee, the Global Tentative List is updated incorporating the new Spanish asset. This list is not subject to evaluation by the committee and its content is the exclusive responsibility of each country.

07 The candidacy for World Heritage must remain on the Tentative List for at least one year.

08 The autonomous community that wishes to present a candidacy (which must already appear on the Tentative List) sends the proposal to the ministry which sends it to Group I of World Heritage so that it can be analysed according to the agreed criteria for inscription on the World Heritage List by the Historical Heritage Council.

The ministry sends the proposal that incorporates the technical annotations made in World Heritage Working Group I to the autonomous community for information and corrections. The autonomous community presents the final proposal for candidacy for the World Heritage List before the Historical Heritage Council, for evaluation.

Once it has been approved by the council, the autonomous community sends the file to the ministry, which will send it to the World Heritage Center on the dates indicated below.

09 The ministry may, at the request of the autonomous community, present at this time the draft candidacy file to the World Heritage Center (voluntary submission, as indicated in the next point).

10 A deadline is established for the ministry to present the draft candidacy file to the World Heritage Center. Although this is a voluntary submission, it is recommended, since the World Heritage Center makes observations of a formal nature (not content) that are useful to improve the final file.

11 The World Heritage Center responds within this 15-day period to the state party indicating whether the candidacy file is complete. If it is not, it indicates what information would be missing to complete the proposal through a report.

12 A month later, the ministry sends the final candidacy file to the World Heritage Center. Registration proposals received after this date may only be considered in the next cycle.

13 Once the proposals have been examined, the World Heritage Center registers each candidacy file and acknowledges receipt to the state party. It also informs about whether the proposal is complete or not.

Registration proposals that are not complete will not be transmitted for evaluation by the advisory bodies.

Complete registration proposals are transmitted to the competent advisory bodies for evaluation (IUCN for natural assets and ICOMOS for cultural assets).

14 Evaluation by advisory bodies (UICN and ICOMOS).

During this period, the on-site evaluation mission takes place by one or more experts from the consultative bodies to compare the conditions of integrity and authenticity, the limits, the state of conservation, the protection, conservation and management of the asset. In parallel, other experts remotely evaluate other issues such as the outstanding universal value of the proposal and the criteria that support it.

The consultative bodies invite the representatives of the state party and the promoters of the candidacy to a meeting to report on the status of its evaluation.

15 If necessary, the competent bodies may request additional information from the state party before and during the evaluation and no later than January 31 of year 3.

16 Within a period of 10 days, the states party must submit to the World Heritage Center the complementary information requested by the competent consultative bodies.

17 Before the annual session of the World Heritage Committee (around 4 or 5 weeks) the competent consultative bodies deliver their evaluations and recommendations to the World Heritage Center for transmission to the World Heritage Committee and the interested states party.

18 At least 14 working days before the opening of the annual session of the World Heritage Committee.

Correction of minor errors of form and/or content by the states party.

The ministry will contact the autonomous community to deliver the evaluation of the consultative bodies and the draft decision for the World Heritage Committee.

EThe ministry may send, at least 14 business days before the opening of the committee session, a letter to the president of the committee, with a copy to the advisory bodies, listing minor errors that may have been detected in the evaluation of its proposal made by the consultative bodies.

19 Annual session of the World Heritage Committee. The committee studies the registration proposals and makes its decisions.

During the committee sessions, the advisory body presents the conclusions of the report and the proposed decision is read, which may be debated by the members of the committee, asking, where appropriate, specific questions to provide more information to the state party.

The committee may adopt one of the following decisions:

1.Inscription of the asset on the World Heritage List.

2.Non-inscription on the World Heritage List (this means that the candidacy cannot be submitted again).

3.Return: the state party is requested to expand the information in the candidacy file, which can be submitted on February 1 of the following year.

4.Defer: the state party is requested to carry out an in-depth reformulation of the candidacy, which can be resubmitted following the year and a half cycle and with a new evaluation mission.

20 The update of the new assets incorporated into the World Heritage List and the decisions taken during the annual session of the World Heritage Committee is published.

Credits texts, photos and drawings: Carlos Pérez Marín