Onder: Zollverein Coal MineComplex EssenPhoto: wwwuppertal, CC BY-NC 2.036 2015/04 S+ROThemaWerelderfgoedUNESCO-World Heritage,a catalyst or a burden forurban development?Boven: Elbe Valley DresdenPhoto:Thomas Quine, CC BY 2.0UNESCO-World Heritage, acatalyst or a burden forurban development?A view on German UNESCOWorld Heritage CitiesS+RO 2015/04 37ThemaWerelderfgoedUNESCO-World Heritage,a catalyst or a burden forurban development?Michael KloosRWTH Aachen Universitykloos@isl.rwth-aachen.dePresently, there are frequent discus-sions about whether cultural heritagein general, and the UNESCO WorldHeritage Status in particular, cancontribute to urban and regionaldevelopment on an economic level. InGermany a lot of UNESCO WorldHeritage Cities have problems mana-ging their rich cultural heritage.Conflicts in Dresden and the otherGerman UNESCO World Heritage Citiesshow that preservation and sustaina-ble development is an extremelychallenging task.In the Atlas voor gemeenten 2015 it wasstated recently that in the Netherlands,only `monumental cities' still canachieve significant growing rates.Furthermore, it was mentioned thatmonumental cities are not onlyattractive for tourists, but also forwell-educated and young inhabitants.As a result, inhabitants of `monumentalcities' are on average younger, betterqualified and better off than those in`non-monumental' cities.1 The frontrunner of the city-ranking in this study,Amsterdam, was listed as a UNESCOWorld Heritage City in 2010.In Germany however, a lot of UNESCOWorld Heritage Cities have hit theheadlines in recent years due toproblems with managing their richcultural heritage. Particularly discus-sions referring to transformations ofwell-known historic city silhouettes,due to plans to build new high-risebuildings, new traffic infrastructure orwind turbines for example, have led tobitter and extremely emotionaldiscussions. Cologne for examplewitnessed a discussion about whethera cluster of five high-rise buildingscould be built in the immediate vicinityof Cologne Cathedral, inscribed in 1997in the UNESCO World Heritage List.2Heading these conflicts was thequestion about the so-called Waldschl-osschen Bridge in the former UNESCOWorld Heritage site Dresden Elbe Valley.Inscribed in the UNESCO World HeritageList in 2004, this site was again delistedonly five years later after bitterdiscussions amongst Dresden's citypopulation and an open disputebetween high-ranking politicians fromthe Federal State of Saxony and theUNESCO World Heritage Committee.3It seems that the eligible UNESCO WorldHeritage Label leads to contradictoryconsequences. On the one hand, it is awell-known quality feature and anasset in the consistently hardercompetition between cities. On theother hand, the conflicts in Dresden andthe other German UNESCO WorldHeritage Cities show clearly that thepreservation and sustainable develop-ment of UNESCO World Cities is anextremely challenging task. So thequestion might be asked whether theWorld Heritage Status is a catalyst or aburden for urban development andwhich lessons can be learnt from thecase of Dresden?UNESCO?s globalcultural networkAt present, more than 1.000 sites areinscribed in the UNESCO World HeritageList. By far the most of these sites arelocated in urban agglomerations, andnumerous cities are currently in theprocess of preparing World Heritagenominations. It is obvious why theUNESCO Heritage Status is so attractivefor cities. In a consistently morestrongly globalised world wheretourism in general, and especially citytourism, is a rapidly growing market,urban decision-makers see integrationinto the global cultural network ofUNESCO as a unique selling point.Representatives of the Bavarian WorldHeritage City Bamberg for instancestate that UNESCO's high qualitystandards in particular help to stimu-late cultural tourism, new well-educa-ted and wealthy inhabitants and evennew job opportunities.4Another significant example which isoften quoted as a prime example of theeconomical attractiveness of theUNESCO World Heritage status inGermany is the Zollverein Coal MineComplex in Essen. After almost all jobshad been lost when the mining areawas closed down in 1986, an evaluationshowed that in the year 2007, only sixyears after the inscription in theUNESCO World Heritage List in 2001, atotal of 2.200 new jobs had beencreated and 160 new companies hadbeen established on the former miningsite. Instead of some 15,000 peoplevisiting the area in 2001, already morethan 700.000 persons were registeredin 2007 and even more are expected inthe future. As a result, 340 additionaljobs had been created to host theincreasing number of visitors.5Avoiding conflictsWhy are some World Heritage sites inurban agglomerations like the Old Townof Bamberg and the Zollverein CoalmineComplex in Essen so successful whileDresden's World Heritage experimentended up as a disaster? A main reasonfor these difference is that the UNESCOWorld Heritage Status was fullysupported on all political levels in thecities of Bamberg and Essen from thevery beginning. In Dresden however,this had not been the case. IndeedDresden's city council took a decision infavour of the nomination of DresdenElbe Valley for the UNESCO WorldHeritage List. But generally, Dresden'spolitical decision-makers, who alreadyknew that the new Waldschl?sschenBridge had been planned, were veryreluctant concerning this idea. Finally,the decision had only been taken aftera large part of Dresden's city popula-tion had been exerting pressure, thusforcing the politicians to decideaccordingly.6 It is therefore notsurprising that the limited politicalbackup for Dresden's UNESCO WorldHeritage Site quickly vanished >>38 2015/04 S+ROThemaWerelderfgoedUNESCO-World Heritage,a catalyst or a burden forurban development?completely when UNESCO voicedserious concerns about the plans tobuild a new bridge. In general, duringDresden?s nomination process theopportunity was missed to createsufficient backup on high-rankingpolitical decision levels for the idea tonominate Dresden Elbe Valley for theUNESCO World Heritage List.Economical impactAlready two years before Dresden ElbeValley had been delisted, Saxony'sformer minister president Milbradt hadcalled the potential loss of the WorldHeritage Status `bearable'.7 Milbradt'sstatement says a lot about the lack ofpolitical support in Dresden for the ideaof preserving a large part of theDresden area as UNESCO WorldHeritage. But it also says a lot aboutwhat the UNESCO World HeritageStatus can do in economical terms andwhat it cannot do. In contrast to theabove-mentioned World Heritage siteZollverein Coal Mine Complex in Essen,which was used as an engine toredevelop a former industrial area inthe Ruhrgebiet, Dresden is one of theeconomically most successful cities inEastern Germany. Already prior to itsnomination for the World Heritage List,Dresden was ranked as one of Germa-ny's top tourist destinations. Even afterDresden's World Heritage Site had beendelisted, the large number of tourists inDresden were barely affected.This shows that the expectationsconcerning the impact of the UNESCOWorld Heritage Status on the economicdevelopment should not in general beoverestimated. Recent scientificresearch has shown clearly that theinfluence of the UNESCO World HeritageStatus on urban economic developmentis not only dependent on this statusitself, but rather on the overalleconomic situation of urban agglome-rations. Cities with economic difficul-ties, especially when located inperipheral spatial locations, can benefitfar more from the World HeritageStatus than economically successfulcities in metropolitan regions.8 This alsoexplains the recent development ofZollverein Coalmine Complex, whereonly a very limited number of visitorsand jobs remained when the site closeddown, but very high growth ratesappeared after the site's inscription inthe UNESCO World Heritage List.Learning lessons fromDresdenHowever, on another level Dresden'sdelisting from the UNESCO WorldHeritage List had serious consequen-ces. UNESCO's measures have beenexperienced in the Federal State ofSaxony and its capital Dresden asembarrassing and a serious loss of face.This shows that the UNESCO WorldHeritage Status has a large impact onideals. The idea of belonging to theinternational community whichcooperates in the identification,protection and active conservation ofcultural and natural heritage conside-red to be of outstanding universal valueto the whole of humanity can stimulatecivic pride. As a result, the UNESCOWorld Heritage Status can be used tocreate holistic strategies for a quality-oriented urban development. It canstimulate bringing partners together,leveraging additional funding toenhance educational benefits and toimprove the quality of conservation. Asdemonstrated in Essen, it can even beused to settle strategies for urbanredevelopment. However, such holisticstrategies can only become successfulif the values to be preserved and theirrelationship to their spatial context arecommunicated in a transparent mannerand are precisely understood by allstakeholders involved. In addition, thecase of Dresden shows clearly that it isparamount to create awareness andbackup from the inhabitants, cityadministrations and political decision-makers already prior to the inscriptionof urban sites on the UNESCO WorldHeritage List.To conclude, it appears that avoidingconflicts, such as in Dresden, andgaining a maximum benefit from theUNESCO World Heritage Status are twosides of the same coin. For both ofthese objectives, cities have to developa clear vision regarding which aimsought to be achieved by the WorldHeritage Status. There must be `a clearand logical chain from the identificationof the issues and problems they wish toaddress to a clear understanding ofhow World Heritage Status could beused to catalyse change and through toinvesting in the resources, activitiesand processes to deliver the desiredimpacts'.9Using the UNESCO WorldHeritage Status as a catalyst for urbandevelopment means much moretherefore than only focusing ontourism or merchandising strategies.Rather, it should be understood as aholistic vision of city development. Inother words, it could also be said thatthe UNESCO World Heritage Status iswhat you make of it and that it isnecessary to `earn' the potential addedvalue of the UNESCO World HeritageStatus by combining socio-economical,ecological and cultural aspects into aholistic management strategy.10 Whenthese opportunities are not seized, theWorld Heritage Status might evenincrease the risk for conflicts such asthose in Cologne and Dresden. Noten1 Dirks, B., `Monumentale stad bloeit alsnooit tevoren', in: de Volkskrant, 28 mei2015.2 Kloos, M.; Manleitner, N.; Rekittke, J. andWachten, K., Unabh?ngiges Gutachten zur`Stadtbildvertr?glichkeitsuntersuchungzu Hochhausplanungen in K?ln, RWTHAachen University, Aachen, Germany,2005. And: Ringbeck, B., Welterbe K?lnerDom: Chronologie eines Streites. Ratder Stadt K?ln beschlie?t ?nderungdes umstrittenen Bebauungsplans.Denkmalpflege im Rheinland, Vol. 23,No. 2., 2006.S+RO 2015/04 39ThemaWerelderfgoedUNESCO-World Heritage,a catalyst or a burden forurban development?Cologne CathedralPhoto:Thomas Depenbusch, CC BY 2.03 Kloos, M;, Korus, C.; Nadrowska, M. andWachten, K., Gutachten zu den visuellenAuswirkungen des `VerkehrszugsWaldschl?sschenbr?cke' auf das UNESCO-Weltkulturerbe `Elbtal Dresden', RWTHAachen University, Aachen, Germany,2006. And: Ringbeck, B. and R?ssler, M.,Between international obligations andlocal politics: the case of the DresdenElbe Valley under the 1972 WorldHeritage Convention. Informationen zurRaumentwicklung, Vol. 3, No. 4., 2011.4 Bamberg is currently preparing a newManagement Plan for its UNESCO WorldHeritage site.5 Kloos, M.,Landscape 4. LandschaftsideenNordeuropas und die visuelle Integrit?tvon Stadt- und Kulturlandschaftenim UNESCO-Welterbe, DissertationRWTH Aachen University,391, sowie EvaluierungsstudieEntwicklungsgesellschaft Zollverein/ExperConsult, in: EntwicklungsgesellschaftZollverein mbH (Hg.): Welterbe Zollverein.Neuanfang. Wachstum. Perspektiven,Essen 2010, pp. 158, 159 und 161.6 Kloos, M., Landscape 4. LandschaftsideenNordeuropas und die visuelle Integrit?tvon Stadt- und Kulturlandschaften imUNESCO-Welterbe, Dissertation RWTHAachen University, 71.7 Kloos, M., Landscape 4. LandschaftsideenNordeuropas und die visuelle Integrit?tvon Stadt- und Kulturlandschaften imUNESCO-Welterbe, Dissertation RWTHAachen University, 71. And: Schorlemmervon, S., Compliance with the UNESCOWorld Heritage Convention: Reflectionson the Elbe Valley and the DresdenWaldschl?sschen Bridge, GermanYearbookof International Law, Vol. 51, 2008.8 Neugebauer, Carola, S., Ans?tzeperspektivischer Stadtentwicklungdurch Inwertsetzung des UNESCO-Weltkulturerbestatus, untersucht inperipheren und metropolen St?dten,Dissertation TU Dresden, 2013. And:Schorlemmer von, S., Compliance withthe UNESCO World Heritage Convention:Reflections on the Elbe Valley and theDresden W aldschl?sschen Bridge, GermanYearbook of International Law, Vol. 51.,2008.9 Rebanks Consulting Ltd and TrendsBusiness Research Ltd: World Heritage.Is there Opportunity for EconomicGain? Research and analysis of thesocio-economic impact potential ofUNESCO World Heritage Site Status,Date unknown. And: Schorlemmervon, S., Compliance with the UNESCOWorld Heritage Convention: Reflectionson the Elbe Valley and the DresdenWaldschl?sschen Bridge, GermanYearbook of International Law, Vol. 51.,2008.10 Rebanks Consulting Ltd and TrendsBusiness Research Ltd: World Heritage.Is there Opportunity for EconomicGain? Research and analysis of thesocio-economic impact potential ofUNESCO World Heritage Site Status, Dateunknown.Michael Kloos works at the Institute forUrban and Regional Planning, Faculty ofArchitecture, RWTH Aachen University,UNESCO Chair in World Cultural andUrban Landscapes.