Presentation short abstract

The UNESCO World Heritage Convention was established in 1972. Since then, “World Heritage” status has been associated with sites that are regarded as of “outstanding universal value”. But, who decides what “value” means, and what kind of “evidence”, motivations and worldviews inform this?

Presentation long abstract

The UNESCO World Heritage Convention was established in 1972 and came into effect in 1976. Since then, “World Heritage” status has been used as a symbol that legitimizes the quality of conservation in sites that are regarded as of “outstanding universal value”. But, who gets to decide what “value” means in this context, and what kind of “evidence”, motivations, discourses and worldviews are taken into account in decision-making processes that inform nomination and inscription processes? There is no clear definition of what “outstanding universal value” means, which results in ambiguity in the implementation processes. It also makes one question how the intangible forms of heritage that are richly found within the African continent are accounted for in the definition of “heritage”, as the one used by UNESCO focuses on tangible, man-made artefacts mostly found in the global North.

This paper uses the lens of iSimangaliso Wetland Park, South Africa’s very first UNESCO World Heritage Site, to critique governance processes underpinning natural world heritage sites. Within iSimangaliso, conservation authorities seek to “re-wild” the site by re-introducing previously occurring plant and animal species to give tourists an experience of the wild. It is not clear how one can create or re-enforce a wilderness in an area that has been occupied by customary people since pre-colonial times. There is ambiguity about whether “outstanding universal value” is really about focusing economic value and/or conservation benefits; rather than about human-environment interactions on the ground.