IAU Extended Case Studies
Purpose of the IAU Extended Case Studies
Following a meeting held in Paris on Nov 15–16, 2010, the International Astronomical Union instructed its Astronomy and World Heritage Working Group, working with other interested parties as appropriate, to prepare a small number of “extended case studies” structured as sections of draft dossiers that would help to highlight issues that might arise if State Parties were to prepare nomination dossiers highlighting the astronomical values of the properties concerned. In this sense, they represent a follow-up to the ICOMOS–IAU Thematic Study in exploring in more detail some of the unresolved issues that the Thematic Study helped to highlight.
Four of the nine ECSs relate directly or indirectly to dark skies issues, reflecting the IAU’s particular concerns about such matters. A dark sky site place could be nominated as a classic cultural and/or natural site, but there will be great difficulties if the dark sky is the sole attribute of the place: other exceptional cultural and/or natural attributes may be needed to strengthen and complement the dark sky quality of the place if it is to have a real chance of inscription onto the WHL. The extended case studies explore ways in which dark skies and light pollution issues could be raised in nomination dossiers.
The remaining ECSs elaborate upon a range of issues raised the Thematic Study. They include modern and ancient sites, single and potential serial transnational nominations, cultural landscapes, space technology heritage, and sites already on the WHL where there may be a strong case for updating the statement of OUV to include astronomical heritage aspects.
These ECSs were discussed at a Working Group meeting held in New Zealand on 14–15 June 2012 and in August were endorsed by the IAU at its General Assembly in Beijing. They are now gradually being publicly released on this site. The full set of extended case studies (see below), together with introductory and editorial notes, will be released as a self-contained electronic publication in due course.
Given that these Extended Case Studies are structured as segments of draft dossiers it is especially important to note that they do NOT represent draft dossiers: these can only be compiled by the national authorities concerned or by international experts following an official request from a State Party to the World Heritage Convention. Even for properties whose demonstrable Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) might be completely related to astronomy, this process involves a wide range of stakeholders and must cover a range of legal and management issues as well as the scientific and heritage issues. This work often takes many years and usually involves coordination by specialist professional consultants.
In particular, while the ECSs include provisional “Criteria under which inscription might be proposed” and “Suggested statement of OUV”, the actual statement of OUV with criteria in the event of a successful nomination is decided by the World Heritage Committee.
Structure of the IAU Extended Case Studies
Authors were asked to adhere to those categories identified in Annex 5 of UNESCO’s Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention that might be relevant to the astronomical aspects of a possible dossier. The categories in question are:
Identification of the property:
Description:
Justification for inscription:
Factors affecting the property:
|
|
|
Protection and management:
Monitoring:
Documentation:
|
|
|
Accessing the IAU Extended Case Studies
The IAU extended case studies were approved for public release at the 28th IAU General Assembly in Beijing, 20–31 August 2012, and are now are gradually becoming accessible via the astronomical heritage finder. They appear as green markers on the map (or white markers if there are also other sources of information relating to the entity concerned).
They may also be accessed using the list view of entities.
| Property | Lead author(s) | Particular issues raised | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
The Royal Observatory, Cape of Good Hope, South Africa |
Ian Glass, South African Astronomical Observatory |
Extent to which value of tangible immovable heritage is strengthened by tangible moveable and intangible heritage; moving v. stationary parts; individual v. serial nomination for historical observatories |
|
|
Baikonur Space Launch Facility, Kazakhstan |
Mikhail Marov, Russian Academy of Sciences |
Relationship of science heritage to technology heritage |
Pending |
|
Seven-stone antas (Portugal and Spain) |
Juan Belmonte, Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain, and Luís Tirapicos, University of Lisbon, Portugal |
Serial nomination involving a group of prehistoric monuments whose astronomical significance is only evident from the group as a whole |
Pending |
|
Chankillo, Peru |
Iván Ghezzi, Pontifica Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Peru |
Values in relation to astronomy v. wider values of related archaeological sites (in Casma valley) |
|
|
Stonehenge World Heritage Site, United Kingdom |
Amanda Chadburn, English Heritage, Bristol, United Kingdom |
Issues relating to the re-inscription of existing WH sites with more explicit recognition of their astronomical values, altered boundaries and/or buffer zone, inclusion of environmental aspects such as (relatively) dark sky preservation, and preservation of significant lines of sight to horizons |
Pending |
|
Star Clocks of Oman |
Harriet Nash, University of Exeter, United Kingdom |
A modern indigenous cultural landscape with cultural practices of star observation that are threatened by the erosion of dark skies; links to other environmental issues (in this case, water management) |
Pending |
|
Aoraki–Mackenzie Dark Sky Reserve, New Zealand |
Margaret Austin, Royal Society of New Zealand and John Hearnshaw, University of Canterbury, New Zealand |
‘Pristine’ dark-sky areas with broad cultural connections |
Pending |
|
Eastern Alpine Starlight Reserve and Großmugl Starlight Oasis, Austria |
Günther Wuchterl, Kuffner-Sternwarte Observatory, Vienna, Austria |
Relatively dark dark-sky areas with few or no direct cultural connections |
Pending |
|
Windows to the Universe: leading optical observatories (Chile, USA and Spain) |
Malcolm Smith, Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory, Chile; Richard Wainscoat, Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, USA; and Cipriano Marín, Starlight Foundation, Spain |
Modern observatory sites under direct threat from light pollution; relevance of cultural associations and indigenous practices to preserving any given observatory and its dark skies |
Pending |
