Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development

Voices of the pioneers: UNESCO's World Heritage Convention 1972-2000

Christina Cameron Mechtild Rössler
Article information:
To cite this document:
Christina Cameron Mechtild Rössler, (2011),"Voices of the pioneers: UNESCO's World Heritage Convention
1972-2000", Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 42 -
54
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129924
Downloaded on: 18 February 2016, At: 19:46 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 4 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 467 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Ana Pereira Roders, Ron van Oers, (2011),"Editorial: bridging cultural heritage and sustainable
development", Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp.
5-14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129898
Bernd von Droste, (2011),"The concept of outstanding universal value and its application: “From
the seven wonders of the ancient world to the 1,000 world heritage places today”", Journal of
Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 26-41 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129915
Jukka Jokilehto, (2011),"World heritage: observations on decisions related to cultural heritage",
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 61-74 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/20441261111129942

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:384956 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/2044-1266.htm

JCHMSD
1,1
Voices of the pioneers:
UNESCO’s World Heritage
Convention 1972-2000
42 Christina Cameron
School of Architecture, Faculte´ de l’ame´nagement, Universite´ de Montre´al,
Montre´al, Canada, and
Mechtild Rössler
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Policy and Statutory Implementation Unit, World Heritage Centre,

UNESCO, Paris, France
Abstract
Purpose – In partnership with UNESCO’s Oral Archives Initiative, the authors have set out to capture
the voices of those who have played a significant role in the creation and early development of the
World Heritage Convention. The recorded interviews with the men and women who were active
participants in this early period are designed to supplement the existing literature and voluminous
documentation from the statutory and expert meetings. The uniqueness of this World Heritage
research project is the important role that the voices of the pioneers will play in illuminating the
successes and failures, the struggles and triumphs of the early years. This paper aims to share some of
the findings.
Design/methodology/approach – The selection of the first group of interviewees has been made on
the basis of the importance of the person’s involvement in World Heritage matters, age, diversity of
interests and geographical distribution. The interviews are structured with specific questions to
identify key issues and cases that have affected the development of the World Heritage system. Topics
are explored and teased out, adapting to the experience of each interviewee.
Findings – To date, the authors have interviewed 31 participants from all geographical regions of
UNESCO. The interviews have created a rich and diverse tapestry of information, concepts and
opinions on the early days of the World Heritage Convention. Participants in the project have been
generous with their time and passionately candid in their views. In this paper, the authors offer a
glimpse into the results of this research by presenting some samples from three interviews.
Originality/value – The interviews provide a unique and original viewpoint on the creation and
early implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Preliminary results point to a deeper
understanding of the forces that led to the creation of the convention and the leadership role played by
certain individuals in transforming these ideas for international cooperation into reality. At the
completion of the project, this data set of interviews will be deposited in the UNESCO Archives for
consultation by future generations of researchers.
Keywords Heritage, History, Conservation, Conventions
Paper type Research paper

Journal of Cultural Heritage
Management and Sustainable
Development
Vol. 1 No. 1, 2011
pp. 42-54
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2044-1266
DOI 10.1108/20441261111129924
The Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,
commonly referred to as the World Heritage Convention, can rightly claim to be the
world’s most significant heritage conservation agreement. As UNESCO’s most
successful international instrument, it influences heritage activity in virtually every
country in the world. This article focuses on research being undertaken by the authors
on the creation and early implementation of the World Heritage Convention (1972).
This innovative project complements existing studies by returning to the source
through interviews with those men and women who participated in the early years.
The voices of the pioneers add a new understanding to the original vision for this
international treaty.
 In a stroke of genius, the Convention brought together two separate international Voices of the
initiatives that were being developed along similar lines with the goal of protecting pioneers
cultural heritage sites and natural parks. In the summer of 1972, UNESCO facilitated
the drafting of a single proposal that was approved by UNESCO’s General Conference
on November 16, 1972. The World Heritage Convention was ahead of its time,
encompassing a holistic view of the interdependency of culture and nature, a view
which foreshadowed later developments, including the introduction of the cultural 43
landscape concept.
Currently ratified by 187 countries (out of 193 states currently recognized in the
United Nations system), it has almost universal global participation. So far, there are
911 properties in 151 countries that have been included on the UNESCO World
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Heritage List. Often referred to as a flagship program of UNESCO, the World Heritage
Convention has brought a little known international organization out of the wilderness
and made it a household name the world over.

The research project

The research captures and analyses the historical record of the Convention’s work in
order to illuminate and clarify the evolution of the World Heritage system and its
global impact. It examines the years leading up to the creation of the Convention
and reviews its early implementation. This project will situate the World Heritage
Convention within the broader context of UNESCO, the UN system and other
conservation organizations, as well as other global legal instruments for heritage
protection. The World Heritage system will then be examined through diverse prisms,
including its normative frameworks, constituent bodies, program activities,
personalities and key issues.
In order to present a focussed view of the origins and impact of the Convention, the
authors have chosen the year 2000 as the terminal date for their research. It was at
the turn of the millennium, during the meeting of the World Heritage Committee in
Cairns, Australia (2000), that a series of reforms were adopted that have affected the
subsequent implementation of the Convention. The reforms were targeted at improving
the credibility of the World Heritage system through revised policies and guidelines,
increased participation from all parts of the globe and more transparent decision-
making processes. The authors justify their decision to study the period 1972-2000
on the basis that the implementation of the World Heritage Convention during this
earlier period sets the stage for the future and provides a foil for the activities of the
decade that follows.
The research draws on a broad range of published and archival sources, including
extensive holdings at UNESCO’s archives and library. There is a considerable body of
published literature on the subject of World Heritage, ranging from academic work to
general coffee-table books with marvelous photographs of World Heritage sites. In
addition, major source materials for this research project exist in archives at the
UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the statutory records of the meetings of the World
Heritage Committee and the General Assembly of States Parties. Abundant
documentation also exists in the archives of the three advisory bodies to the
Convention, ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM, as well as government archives of individual
States Party members. For example, the collection of papers from Parks Service
employee Ernest A. Connally at the University of Maryland documents the United States’
participation in the international preservation movement in the 1970s and 1980s,
including the creation and early implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
 JCHMSD Voices of the pioneers
1,1 What makes this project unique is the capture of the voices of World Heritage
pioneers. Key information survives in the memories of individual participants,
especially of major events and discussions held outside Committee meeting rooms
which influenced formal decisions. At the outset, the authors recognized the urgency of
conducting interviews with these key participants on a priority basis before memories
44 fade and disappear. The unique character of this proposal is the extensive research
base that the authors have created through personal interviews with pioneers of the
World Heritage Convention.
This aspect of the research project is linked to UNESCO’s Oral Archives Initiative
through an agreement between UNESCO and the Canada Research Chair on Built
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Heritage at the Université de Montréal (2007-2010). The Oral Archives Initiative is part
of the UNESCO History Project, created to commemorate UNESCO’s 60th anniversary
in 2005. The driving force behind the History Project was a desire to encourage serious
research in external academic institutions on UNESCO’s first 60 years as an
international organization. The specific oral archives dimension aims at collecting
personal accounts of UNESCO’s history from people who have been closely associated
with its activities. It calls for interviews with key players who have been involved in
the life and functioning of UNESCO programs from 1946 to the present.
In partnership with UNESCO’s Oral Archives Initiative, the authors have set out to
capture the voices of those who have played a significant role in the creation and
early development of the World Heritage Convention. The recorded interviews with the
men and women who were active participants in this early period are designed to
supplement the existing literature and voluminous documentation from the statutory
and expert meetings. The uniqueness of this World Heritage research project is the
important role that the voices of the pioneers will play in illuminating the successes
and failures, the struggles and triumphs of the early years.

Interviews
While the interview process is somewhat open ended, the selection of the first group of
interviewees has been made on the basis of the importance of the person’s involvement
in World Heritage matters, age, diversity of interests and geographical distribution. In
some cases, the project came too late to conduct meaningful interviews because the
proposed interviewees had died or were facing important physical and cognitive
challenges. In other cases, the authors were fortunate to carry out interviews with
people who have regrettably passed away since that time, a situation that underscores
the urgency of the project.
Interviews have been conducted in French and in English as determined by the
interviewees. They have been carried out in professional recording studios to ensure
that the audio archival records are of high quality. The interviews are structured with
specific questions to identify key issues and cases that have affected the development
of the World Heritage system. Topics are explored and teased out, adapting to the
experience of each interviewee. Typically, interviews last between one and two hours,
thus giving ample time to elicit a range of viewpoints from the interviewees.
Participants are asked a series of open-ended questions covering the following themes:
the beginning of the World Heritage Convention; key issues that set precedents or
influenced its implementation; strategic directions concerning the World Heritage List;
the composition and behavior of the Committee and the General Assembly of States
Parties; the composition and performance of the World Heritage Advisory Bodies
 (ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM); the effectiveness of protection of World Heritage sites; Voices of the
the role of the UNESCO secretariat; and an overall assessment of the successes and pioneers
failures of the Convention.
To date, 31 participants have been interviewed from all geographical regions
of UNESCO. Each person has played a key role in the World Heritage system. It is
well-known that implementation of the World Heritage Convention depends on three
independent but inter-related constituent parts: the States Parties who have joined the 45
Convention (187 countries), the Advisory Bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM) and
UNESCO (World Heritage Centre). The authors therefore have tried to strike a balance
in seeking representation from the three constituent parts. An early tentative
conclusion of this exercise is the observation that many of the World Heritage pioneers
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

in this sample crossed over during their career from one constituent part to another.
In fact, nine of the 31 participants have been active in two or more roles. With that
proviso in mind, the interviewees are spread rather evenly over the three components:
States Parties (14), Advisory Bodies (15) and UNESCO (13)[1].

Preliminary results
So far, the interviews have created a rich and diverse tapestry of information, concepts
and opinions on the early days of the World Heritage Convention. Participants in the
project have been generous with their time and passionately candid in their views. In
this article, the authors offer a glimpse into the results of this research by presenting
some samples from the interviews. They begin with an interview with Russell Train,
an American environmentalist who offers insights into the origin of the World Heritage
concept. This is followed by perspectives from two former Directors-General of
UNESCO who were directly involved in the World Heritage program: Amadou-Mahtar
M’Bow and Federico Mayor.

Russell E. Train (b. 1920) American environmental leader

In a 2008 interview conducted by Christina Cameron in Arlington, Virginia, Russell
Train (Plate 1), American environmentalist and conservation leader, speaks about the
origins of a World Heritage concept. He attributes the birth of the idea to the 1965
White House Conference on International Cooperation called by President Lyndon
Johnson. Train, then president of the Conservation Foundation, was appointed a
delegate to the conference. “The reason for my involvement was basically I had become
somewhat known as an environmental type and I was on a committee dealing with
international environmental matters[2].”
Train says that the original idea for World Heritage came from the environmental
committee’s chairman, Joseph Fisher, then president of an organization called
Resources for the Future, a Ford Foundation-funded economic think-tank dealing with
resource issues. “Joe Fisher brought into one of our meetings a proposal for a World
Heritage Trust. I don’t think it had been fleshed out in any way. It was conceptual,
what he had put together and quite brief – it may have been in his own hand-writing, I
don’t recall. And he gave me a copy and asked me, what did I think of it. And it was a
new idea as far as I was concerned. As I remember now, his proposal only dealt with
the natural, the wildlife aspects of World Heritage and not the cultural aspects, and
that perhaps reflected his background as president of Resources for the Future. And I
thought that it was an interesting idea on the World Heritage and supported it[2].”
So the “bare bones” of a World Heritage idea became part of the final report of the
1965 White House Conference in the form of a recommendation to establish a “trust for
 JCHMSD
1,1

46
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Plate 1.
Christina Cameron and
Russell Train, Arlington,
Virginia, 2008.
(Photograph courtesy of
Canada Research Chair on
Built Heritage, Université
de Montréal.)

the world heritage that would be responsible to the world community for the
stimulation of international cooperation efforts to identify, establish, develop and
manage the world’s superb natural and scenic areas and historic sites for the present
and future benefit of the entire world citizenry[3]”. No action was taken immediately to
advance it.
Train goes on to explain his involvement in transforming the World Heritage
concept into a formal international initiative during President Richard Nixon’s
administration. Following his 1968 election, Nixon “created a system of task forces on
various subjects to advise him as the incoming President on policy matters”. Train’s
friend, Henry Loomis, was deputy head of this task force operation. Loomis “asked
whether I would head a task force on the environment. That had been something of an
after-thought. There were task forces on defence issues, trade issues, all the sort of
standard panoply of public policy areas, and they’d gotten set up fairly early. [y] Our
key recommendation was that there should be a focal point for environmental policy-
making in the administration, in the Executive Branch of the government. And that
eventually translated into what became the Council on Environmental Quality[2]”.
Train was subsequently appointed as the first chairman of the newly created
Council on Environmental Quality. This gave him an opening to influence the content
of the annual Presidential messages to Congress. In describing Nixon’s interest in
the environment, Train refers to a vignette in Richard Reeve’s Nixon Alone in the White
House:
Nixon sat with a yellow pad in a rocking chair in a back room and listed the things he thought
were high priority – some ten areas of interest such as defence – that he wanted to be very
 much involved with. And then down at the bottom he added a couple of other things and he Voices of the
said “I think these things are high priority but I want nothing to do with them”. One was the
environment[2]. pioneers
Train then describes how the Council on Environmental Quality prepared input for
the annual presidential messages to Congress, including President Nixon’s 1971
message which proposed the creation of a World Heritage Trust[4]. Train recounts how
the President’s message was linked to the centennial of the first national park and the 47
beginning of the national parks movement worldwide:
Yellowstone was accorded this status of being a national park because it had values so unique
and so outstanding that they really belonged not just to the people of Wyoming or the other
states involved but to all the people of the United States and therefore the idea of the national
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

park. And he [Nixon] said, just as we did that to recognize Yellowstone’s unique quality so too
on the international level there are areas and assets of such unique importance and value that
they belong to all mankind, or should, hence the idea of the World Heritage[2].
In recalling these events, Train continues to underline the significance of the international
community’s shared responsibility to protect the global common (Train (1992)). “I do
think that the whole World Heritage concept is a wonderful one and in its demonstration
of how in fact we all do have a common heritage and that heritage not only belongs to
each and every one of us but we belong to it. [y] [it] is a concept that brings us together
rather than divides us, as so many of the national issues do. I think if we can manage
somehow to keep that concept in front of us, that’s a great contribution[2]”.

Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow (b. 1921) Senegalese educator and Director-General of UNESCO

1974-1987
In 2009, Mechtild Rössler interviewed former Director-General of UNESCO, Amadou-
Mahtar M’Bow, at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris in the presence of UNESCO
librarian Petra Van Den Born (Plate 2). M’Bow is a key participant who was involved
with the development, approval and implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
He was sent to UNESCO by Senegal, and later became a UNESCO employee. The
World Heritage Convention was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO in
1972 when he was Assistant Director-General for Education. During his tenure as
Director-General of UNESCO from 1974 to 1987, this Senegalese educator presided
over the initial implementation of the Convention, beginning with the election of the
first World Heritage Committee at the General Assembly of States Parties in Nairobi,
Kenya, on November 26, 1976.
As part of a wide-ranging interview, M’Bow confirms Russell Train’s view on the
role of the United States in initiating the World Heritage concept. In addition, he places
strong emphasis on professionalism in implementing the Convention and supports a
broad interpretation of universality.
In speaking of the origins of the convention, M’Bow notes the importance of
the 1965 White House Conference in articulating a broad definition of heritage and
promoting the idea of global significance. In speaking about the Washington
conference, M’Bow says that, “during the course of this meeting, the idea was launched
to save the heritage of different regions, of different groups. What ensued were ideas
about the need to consider this heritage, first to identify it, that is to say to know where
this heritage was situated, to see if this heritage deserved to be considered as a
common property for humanity, even if it belonged to a country; then to identify it,
preserve it, protect it, conserve it and interpret it[5]”.
 JCHMSD
1,1

48
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Plate 2.
Petra Van Den Born,
Mechtild Rössler and
Amadou Mahtar M’Bow,
UNESCO Headquarters,
Paris, 2009. (Photograph
courtesy of Canada
Research Chair on Built
Heritage, Université de
Montréal.)

With passion, M’Bow underscores the need for technical and professional expertise in
the implementation of the Convention, stating clearly his view that countries should be
represented by professional experts rather than by their diplomats. He builds his
argument on changes he has observed within UNESCO more generally and the need
for expertise to protect heritage properties:
The great drama at UNESCO now in my view, allow me to go further, is the change to its
constitution and countries being represented at the Executive Board by diplomats instead of by
[y] In my time, it was professional people. We were elected in our personal name. It was not my
country that sat at the Executive Board; I sat at Executive Board as Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow,
elected by the General Conference, to ensure that the secretariat carried out the resolutions voted
by the General Conference [y] I think that professional representation, even if countries want to
be represented, that countries should choose professionals and not diplomats. I have nothing
against diplomats, but diplomats don’t have innate knowledge, they are not familiar with a
certain number of problems. It is necessary to choose people who are knowledgeable and
obviously know how to safeguard places. There, then, I am very clear and straightforward[6].
As for the interpretation of “universal,” part of the World Heritage requirement for
properties to meet the threshold of Outstanding Universal Value, M’Bow pays homage
to the influence of Africa and Latin America in bringing forward the idea of universal
heritage and for enlarging the scope of the concept:
These African countries came here with the idea that their cultural creations, which had been
suppressed during the colonial period, should be brought to the fore. The paradigm of
colonization, it was first a racial problem on the part of white people, it was about primitive
people. The paradigm was also about not having any culture, about not having any history.
 So [y] these African countries began to raise the issue of cultural identity and the need to Voices of the
give consideration to the culture of others. That also contributed to fostering the idea of a
universal world heritage by saying: but human creations do not exist only in one part of the pioneers
world, they exist in all parts of the world and consequently one has to take into consideration
heritage in its entirety, no matter where this heritage is situated [y] Hence a vision, in my
view a universal vision – but really universal – that takes into consideration all humanity in
its different manifestations and the creations of all people, whoever they are[7].
49
He goes on to argue that the inscription of the contemporary city of Brasilia proves that
the concept of Outstanding Universal Value is broad and flexible, allowing for the
inclusion of ancient and recent heritage.

Federico Mayor (b. 1934) Spanish scholar, politician and Director-General of UNESCO
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

1987-1999
In June 2009, Christina Cameron interviewed former Director-General of UNESCO,
Federico Mayor, at the headquarters of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace, Madrid,
in the presence of the Spanish professor, and former president of the ICOMOS-IFLA
Committee on landscapes and Gardens, Carmen Anon Féliu (Plate 3). The interviewee’s
experience with World Heritage goes beyond his 12 years as Director-General of
UNESCO to include a stint under Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow as Deputy Director-General
(1978-1981). In the 2009 interview, Federico Mayor discusses a broad range of issues
concerning the role of UNESCO in fostering a culture of peace. With regard to the
World Heritage Convention, he elaborates on the concept of Outstanding Universal
Value and the influence of World Heritage on the daily lives of the global community.

Plate 3.
Christina Cameron and
Federico Mayor, Madrid,
2009. (Photograph
courtesy of Canada
Research Chair on Built
Heritage, Université de
Montréal.)
 JCHMSD In speaking of the concept of Outstanding Universal Value, Mayor notes the influence
1,1 of René Maheu, Director-General of UNESCO from 1962 to 1974. He attributes the use
of the word “outstanding” to Maheu, “a man of great linguistic precision
and also conceptual”. According to Mayor, the reason behind the emphasis on
exceptional is to distinguish World Heritage properties from the rest. “When we speak
of heritage [y] there are so many magnificent works, there are places that are fantastic
50 from the point of view of beauty [y] of culture, of history, of creative effort, sometimes
of courage [y] That is why I find the word outstanding to be absolutely essential[8].”
In his interview Mayor reflects on the essence of Outstanding Universal Value
which he links directly to manifestations of human creativity. He points to the
archaeological sites in Guatemala as proof that for centuries human beings have
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

demonstrated “this distinct capacity which is the only divine quality [y] creativity[8]”.
In response to a question about regional balance in the World Heritage List,
Mayor encourages the researchers to explore the reasons why some geographical
spaces have greater concentrations of cultural sites than others. His view is that certain
regions have never had the possibility of using building materials that are capable of
resisting the elements:
It is good that, with your Chair, you can perhaps describe why certain geographical spaces
have a great concentration of cultural sites and others have fewer, for the reason that I am
giving. It is because they did not have the possibility of building with materials that were
capable of surviving over the centuries, like the pyramids at Giza[9].
In one segment of the 2009 interview, Mayor speaks specifically about African
heritage. He warns that one must not simply concentrate on stone structures because
“for centuries, Africa built with wood and the wood has disappeared”. One must take
into account the specificities of different cultures “because they also have enormous
creativity [y] that is the reason why I insist so much on the need to always think
about the human being because those are the monuments that UNESCO should
safeguard[10]”. For him, the distinguishing feature of cultural World Heritage Sites is
creativity.
Mayor places equal value on the architectonic aspects and the intangible
dimensions of heritage places. To illustrate his point, he cites the example of Baeza and
Ubeda in Spain. In commenting to Spanish officials on an early proposal for the
inscription of these two cities, Mayor describes how he pointed out that the nomination
file had not yet demonstrated their exceptional nature. He encouraged the officials to
broaden their proposal beyond architecture to include the historical and intangible
dimensions that Baeza and Ubeda embody, in what Mayor calls their “fabulous
mixture” of Christian and Arab Muslim cultures. “You have to add to the strictly
architectural values this historical dimension and this dimension of inter-religious
dialogue that it represents[11]”.
He also speaks about the relevance of the World Heritage Convention to the daily
lives of the global community, focussing particularly on the influence of sites of
conscience. Reflecting on the deep emotion he personally felt when visiting the Island
of Gorée in Senegal, and Auschwitz Birkenau in Poland, Mayor notes with regret that
everyday events can dim these deep and sincere responses. He reminds us that the
strength of the World Heritage List is that it is composed of both celebratory places and
sites with negative connotations:
That’s exactly what I believe we should have in the general list of our heritage. You see, it is
beauty, it is greatness, the splendour of cultures [y] the Alhambra, the Pyramids [y] you
 could say Machu Picchu, what a marvel! And Tikal, how marvellous! But at the same time Voices of the
we must have this list, thankfully more limited, but this list where we say, that is something
we should remember every day because it is there that we can find an impact on our daily pioneers
behaviour. And for me, culture has a supreme definition, and that’s our daily behaviour[12].
Near the end of the interview, Mayor sums up his view of World Heritage, describing it
as marvellous because it has envisioned a common heritage for all humanity:
What a marvel the Convention is [y] It has generated this vision that there are some aspects 51
of humanity that belong to us all. You know, it is so important that they belong to all because
there are some people who want these things to belong only to them. It is wonderful in my
opinion to see that heritage belongs to all people[13].
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Conclusion
In total, 31 pioneers have been interviewed to date. The authors continue to complete
the schedule of interviews with others who have participated in the creation and early
implementation of the World Heritage Convention. While a systematic analysis of the
research findings remains to be done, preliminary results point to a deeper
understanding of the forces that led to the creation of the convention and the leadership
role played by certain individuals in transforming these ideas for international
cooperation into reality. In this sample, more than one of the interviewees confirms the
leadership role played by the USA at the outset, the importance of recognizing
diverse manifestations of heritage and creativity as well as the principle that these
places bear such significance that they belong to all humanity. By voicing their
opinions and hinting at the complex human interactions that were at work in the early
days, the interviewees add a new dimension to the ongoing studies on this topic. For
those millions of people worldwide who are involved today in one way or another in the
implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the vision of the pioneers may
inspire and guide them in their work. At the completion of the project, this data set of
interviews will be deposited in the UNESCO Archives for consultation by future
generations of researchers.

Notes
1. In alphabetical order, the following persons have been interviewed: Carmen Anon Féliu,
Azédine Beschaouch, Gérard Bolla, Mounir Bouchenaki, Henry Cleere, Jim Collinson,
Bernd von Droste, Catherine Dumesnil, Regina Durighello, Harold Eidsvik, Bernard Feilden
(in writing), Francesco Francioni, Zhan Guo, Natarajan Ishwaran, Jukka Jokilehto, Franc¸ois
Leblanc, Francisco Javier Lopes Morales, Jean-Louis Luxen, Koichiro Matsuura, Federico
Mayor, Amadou Mahtar M’Bow, Jeff McNeely, Rob Milne, Dawson Munjeri, Adrian Phillips,
Léon Pressouyre (d. 2009), Anne Raidl, Jane Robertson, Jim Thorsell, Russell Train and Licia
Vlad-Borelli.
2. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Russell E. Train by Christina Cameron, Arlington, Virginia, December 2, 2008.
3. Francioni and Lenzerini (2005). While the book cites an article by R. Meyer, the original
version of this recommendation is found in the report of Fisher’s Committee: “The National
Citizens’ Commission, Report of the Committee on Natural Resources Conservation and
Development to the White House Conference on International Cooperation, Washington, D.C.,
28 November–1 December 1965”, John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum
(Boston, MA), Samuel E. Belk Personal Papers, Box 10, 19. The authors are grateful to Peter
Stott for making this document available to them.
 JCHMSD 4. USA National Park Service Archives, Circular 175, Request for authority to negotiate a
multilateral treaty creating a World Heritage Trust, February 9, 1971. “In the President’s
1,1 February 8, 1971 message transmitting his environmental program, he directed ‘the
Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Council on Environmental Quality, and
under the foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State to develop initiatives for
presentation in appropriate international forums to further the objective of a World Heritage
Trust.’ The purpose of a World Heritage Trust, as set forth in the President’s message, is to
52 extend special international recognition to areas or sites of such natural, historical or cultural
significance that they should be regarded as part of the heritage of all mankind, and to create
a method of international cooperation in the management, protection and preservation of
such sites”.
5. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Amadou Mahtar M’Bow by Mechtild Rössler assisted by Petra Van Den Born, Paris France,
October 22, 2009. Original text: “Au cours de cette réunion, l’idée avait été lancée aussi de
sauvegarder le patrimoine de différents, de différents horizons, de différentes parties,
venaient des idées sur la nécessité de considérer ce patrimoine, d’abord de l’identifier, c’est-à-
dire de savoir où se trouve ce patrimoine, de voir si ce patrimoine méritait d’être considéré
comme un bien commun de l’humanité, même s’il appartient à un pays; ensuite de l’identifier,
le préserver, le sauvegarder, le conserver et le mettre en valeur”.
6. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Amadou Mahtar M’Bow by Mechtild Rössler assisted by Petra Van Den Born, Paris France,
October 22, 2009. Original text: “Le grand drame de l’UNESCO, maintenant, permettez-moi
d’aller plus loin, à mon avis, c’est d’avoir changé l’acte constitutif et de faire représenter au
conseil exécutif les pays par des diplomates au lieu de le faire [y] De mon temps, c’était des
professionnels. Nous nous étions élus à titre personnel. Ce n’est pas mon pays qui siégeait au
conseil exécutif, je siégeais au conseil exécutif en tant que Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, élu par la
conférence générale, pour m’assurer que le Secrétariat appliquait les résolutions votées
par la conférence générale. [y] je pense donc que la représentation professionnelle, même
si les États veulent se faire représenter, que les États choisissent les professionnels et non
pas des diplomates. Je n’ai rien contre les diplomates, mais les diplomates n’ont pas la
science infuse, ne connaissent pas donc un certain nombre de problèmes et qu’il faut choisir
des gens qui connaissent et qui peuvent évidemment sauvegarder. Alors, là, je suis très
clair et net”.
7. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Amadou Mahtar M’Bow by Mechtild Rössler assisted by Petra Van Den Born, Paris France,
October 22, 2009. Original text: “Ces pays africains y viennent avec l’idée qu’il fallait aussi
mettre en valeur leurs créations culturelles qui avaient été niées pendant la période coloniale.
Le paradigme de la colonisation, c’était d’abord un problème racial de la part des blancs,
c’était des sauvages, le paradigme également, vous n’avez pas de culture, le paradigme, vous
n’avez pas d’histoire. Alors [y] ces pays africains ont commencé à poser les problèmes de
l’identité culturelle et de la nécessité de prendre en considération la culture des autres. Cela a
contribué à favoriser aussi l’idée du patrimoine mondial universel en disant : mais des
créations humaines n’existent pas seulement dans une partie du monde, elles existent dans
toutes les parties du monde et qu’en conséquence, il faut prendre en considération l’ensemble
du patrimoine, quelque soit l’endroit où se situe ce patrimoine. [y] Donc, une vision, à mon
avis qui soit une vision universelle – mais réellement universelle – qui prend en
considération l’ensemble de l’humanité dans ses composantes différentes et les créations de
tous les peuples quelques étaient ces peuples”.
8. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain, Paris,
France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “Quand nous parlons du patrimoine [y] il y a tellement
des œuvres magnifiques, il y a des endroits qui sont formidables du point de vue de la beauté,
 [y] de la culture, de l’histoire, de l’effort de créativité, parfois de courage . [y] C’est pour Voices of the
cela que je trouve que ce mot, exceptionnel, c’est absolument essentiel”.
pioneers
9. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain, Paris,
France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “C’est bon que dans votre Chaire, vous pourriez peut-être
faire cette description de pourquoi il y a quelques espaces géographiques qui ont une plus
grande concentration de lieux culturels et il y a des autres qui n’ont moins parce que par la 53
raison que je vous dis, c’est parce qu’ils n’avaient pas la possibilité de construire avec
des éléments qui étaient capables de, comme les pyramides de Gizeh, de résister pendant
des siècles”.
10. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain, Paris,
France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “parce qu’elles avaient aussi une énorme créativité [y]
c’est pour cela que moi j’insiste tellement qu’il faut toujours penser à l’être humain parce que
c¸a c’est les monuments que l’UNESCO doit sauvegarder”.
11. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain, Paris,
France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “Il faut ajouter aux valeurs strictement architectoniques
cette dimension historique et cette dimension de, finalement, interlocution interreligieuse que
c¸a représentait”.
12. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain, Paris,
France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “Je crois que nous devrions précisément avoir dans la
liste générale de notre patrimoine, et voilà tout c¸a, c’est la beauté, c’est la grandeur, c’est
la splendeur des cultures [y] l’Alhambra, les Pyramides [y] vous pouvez dire Machu
Picchu, quelle merveille! Et Tikal, quelle merveille! Mais en même temps il faudrait avoir
cette liste, plus restreinte heureusement, mais cette liste dans laquelle on dit: c’est c¸a à
se souvenir chaque jour parce que c’est là où nous pouvons trouver un impact à notre
comportement quotidien. Et pour moi, la culture a une suprême définition, c’est notre
comportement chaque jour”.
13. Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal, audio interview with
Federico Mayor by Christina Cameron assisted by Carmen Anon Féliu, Madrid, Spain,
Paris, France, June 18, 2009. Original text: “Quelle merveille a été la Convention [y] elle a
généré cette vision qu’il y a quelques aspects de l’humanité qui nous appartiennent à tous.
Vous savez c’est tellement important qu’ils nous appartiennent à tous parce que il y a
quelques personnes qui souhaitent que seulement ils n’appartiennent qu’à eux les choses et
c’est merveilleux à mon avis voir que le patrimoine appartient à tous”.

References
Canada Research Chair on Built Heritage, Université de Montréal (2007-2010), audio interviews
with World Heritage pioneers.
Francioni, F. and Lenzerini, F. (2005), The 1972 World Heritage Convention: A Commentary,
Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 15-16.
Train, R. (1992), “The world heritage convention: the first twenty years and beyond”, Report of
the Rapporteur on the sixteenth session of the World Heritage Committee in Sante Fé, 7-14
December 1992 (Sante Fé, 14 December 1992): WHC-92/CONF.002/12,Annex [V], available
at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/2511.
United States National Park Service Archives, World Heritage 1970-1975.
 JCHMSD About the authors
Christina Cameron (Dr) became a member of the Canadian delegation to the World Heritage
1,1 Committee in 1987 as part of her work as Director General of National Historic Sites in
Parks Canada. She subsequently headed Canada’s delegation to the World Heritage Committee
from 1990 to 2008, chairing several international World Heritage experts meetings on strategic
planning, historic canals, cultural landscapes, working methods and the Global Strategy
54 for a representative World Heritage List. She was a co-sponsor of the unsuccessful
proposal to establish a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE).
She served as Rapporteur at the 13th session (Paris, 1989) and was twice elected as Chairperson
of the World Heritage Committee for the 14th session (Banff, 1990) and the 32nd session
(Quebec, 2008). In 2009 she addressed all national delegations at UNESCO Headquarters
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)

on the future of the World Heritage Convention. Christina Cameron now directs a research
program on World Heritage issues in her new role as Professor at the School of Architecture
at the University of Montreal where she holds the Canada Research Chair on Built
Heritage. Christina Cameron is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: christina.
cameron@umontreal.ca
Mechtild Rössler (Dr) joined UNESCO in 1991. She began working first within the Division
for Ecological Sciences, and subsequently, in 1992, at the World Heritage Centre as a Program
Specialist for Natural Heritage and Cultural Landscapes. In July 2001 she became Chief of the
Europe and North America Section in charge of half of all World Heritage Sites and 50 States
Parties to the World Heritage Convention. She has organized many international expert meetings
on various aspects of the Convention, particularly related to heritage conservation and
monitoring. In addition to her scholarly publications on World Heritage matters, she is a regular
Lecturer in the World Heritage studies program at the Technical University BTU Cottbus
(Germany), UCD Dublin (Ireland) and the Polytechnic, Turino (Italy). Her particular interest has
been the creation and development of the World Heritage cultural landscapes category of World
Heritage Sites, focussing on the interaction between people and the environment, as well as links
between cultural and biological diversity. The exploration of these subjects has paved the way
for more diverse nominations to World Heritage, thereby contributing to a more globally
representative List.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Ana Pereira Roders, Ron Van Oers. 2014. Wedding cultural heritage and sustainable development: three
years after. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development 4:1, 2-15. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
2. Aurélie Elisa Gfeller. 2013. Negotiating the meaning of global heritage: ‘cultural landscapes’ in the
UNESCO World Heritage Convention, 1972–92. Journal of Global History 8, 483-503. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by University of Massachusetts Amherst At 19:46 18 February 2016 (PT)