View article

The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, adopted by the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1972, is widely seen as a very successful undertaking. Almost all states–that is, 191–have ratified it by now, and despite the educational priorities of that UN special agency, World Heritage is the first thing that comes to mind for many people when they hear its name. World Heritage has been the single most influential force in making “heritage” the buzzword it is today and in spreading heritage discourses and practices across the globe, and it has also contributed to the formation of heritage studies as a new interdisciplinary field and the establishment of “World Heritage Studies” graduate programmes from Dublin over Cottbus to Tsukuba. A World Heritage title can be a huge boost for tourism, investments, aid, and local and national status. While the protective effect depends strongly on the susceptibility of the respective state to public pressure and on the nature of the domestic political debate, the World Heritage institutions–despite disposing of not more than “soft power,” as outlined in the Introduction–have won major victories in battles against high-rises in historic town centres or highways through nature reserves. World Heritage has been significant enough to provoke war, such as when the World Heritage designation of the ancient Khmer temple Preah Vihear in 2008–on territory disputed between Cambodia and Thailand–was followed by several bloody clashes between the two armies. So important has the UNESCO endeavour …