the ancient city of dresden, a delicate baroque confection lovingly reconstructed after the second world war, has thrilled visitors with its skyline, best viewed from the banks of the river elbe. not for much longer. to the outrage of conservationists, work is underway on a new bridge to carry a four-lane highway across the valley, marring the vista forever. in a potent gesture of protest, unesco recently stripped the city of its status as a world heritage site.
some might consider that a harsh penalty. after all, the world heritage ranking placed dresden alongside the great wall of china and the taj mahal as a monument of "outstanding universal value." but to the locals, ridding the city of choking traffic was more important than any accolade. in two referendums, they supported the bridge plan. as city councilor jan mücke said, "in a democracy, we cannot have a dictatorship of a minority that, acting out of esthetic grounds, thinks they know more than the overwhelming majority of citizens."
world heritage status sure isn't what it used to be. plenty of countries still strive to earn a place on unesco's list and reap the benefits of the tourism boom that normally follows, but some are beginning to question the honor's long-term value. in the developed world, there's sometimes resentment at outside interference; elsewhere there's deepening concern that the scheme, intended to preserve the world's greatest treasures, may actually be contributing to their demise. underfunded and armed with little more than moral authority, unesco can't do much to help the swelling number of sites—the tally now approaches 900—it singles out for distinction. "among conservationists there is sometimes a feeling that if conservation is the goal, then we should leave these places alone," says peter fowler, a british archeologist who has worked with unesco.
trouble is, conservation is not always the goal. for national governments and local traders, a world heritage listing represents a marketing tool that can turn obscure sites into must-see destinations. the repercussions are hard to prevent. in the ancient western chinese city of lijiang, the number of annual visitors climbed from 1.7 million to 4.6 million in the 10 years since it was listed in 1997. in the words of a unesco mission last year, "commercial interests have driven measures to facilitate large numbers of tourists, compromising the authentic heritage values which attracted visitors to the property in the first place.''
the same is true of angkor wat, the vast temple complex that is now cambodia's leading tourist draw. since the site gained world heritage status in 1992, the number of visitors has leapt from fewer than 10,000 to more than 1 million a year. now a sprawling town has grown up to serve the hordes of tourists that arrive daily. worse, local hotels have been extracting water from underground reserves, threatening to undermine the temples themselves. "being a world heritage site can contribute [to visitor numbers] between 10 times and 500 times over five years," says jeff morgan of the world heritage fund. "instead of a small paragraph in frommer's, it suddenly gets three pages. and if a site is not ready, you can get thousands of people crawling over it."
there is no question that unesco can exert a positive influence. the organization can be "discreetly effective" in preventing the worst depredations, says francesco bandarin, director of the paris-based world heritage center, which runs the list. if the great pyramids of giza can be seen against the sunset without a highway marring the view, tourists can thank pressure from unesco. still, bandarin concedes, "we can provide one more layer of protection, but it's far from perfect."
resources are severely stretched. the world heritage center employs fewer than 100 people, and its annual revenue of some $20 million, including donations, leave nothing to help poor countries struggling to save sites. "it needs 10 times as much money," says morgan.
some national authorities resent unesco's meddling. unesco can place listed sites that it believes are being compromised on an endangered list and, in extreme cases, scratch them altogether—a punishment applied only twice in the program's 37-year history. in addition to dresden, an oryx sanctuary in oman was struck off in 2007 after the government reduced the park's size by 90 percent to allow for oil drilling. unesco's decision to place yellowstone national park on its endangered list in 1995 after a private company proposed mining for gold nearby fortified american mistrust of u.n. interference—and helps explain why the u.s. has since failed to propose any new sites.
one option might be to restrict the list and focus resources on those most in need. in the past five years unesco has added more than 100 sites—including 13 this year alone—which only undermines the concept, say critics. "the longer [the list] becomes, the more it dilutes the brand," says jonathan foyle of the world monuments fund. already it's hard to see what unites, say, a volcanic island off iceland, namibian rock paintings, and the sydney opera house.
competition between countries—italy and spain have long vied for the largest number of sites—has already forced unesco to limit the number of new nominations per country to just two a year. yet the organization is keen to encourage more applications from outside europe and north america—home to more than half the sites—to correct what's been seen as a western bias. at fault may be the very idea of highlighting a site's particular merits. in the end, the best hope for saving the legacy of the past may be a future of obscurity.
古城德雷斯顿，二战后钟爱地重建成一个精美的巴洛克式建筑的城市，一直吸引参观者到来，从易北河的岸边远望是一个最好的角度来从空中欣赏它。但是再也无法欣赏到这样的美景了。因为保守主义者的愤怒，正在建一座4道高速公路的新桥，将穿过山谷，也将永远损害这美丽的景色。联合国教科文组织坚决反对，近日，将其列为为世界遗产之一。
有些人可能认为那是一个严厉的惩罚。毕竟，世界遗产排名将德雷斯顿同中国的万里长城和印度的泰姬陵一同视为“世界不朽的遗产”的一种纪念。但是对当地人来说，解决这个城市严重的交通堵塞比任何赞誉都更为重要。在两次公民投票中，人们都支持建桥计划。正如该城市议员詹·谬克所言：“在一个民主国家，我们不能有一个独裁的制度，一小部分人出于审美的层面认为他们所了解的就比绝大部分市民知道的多。”
世界遗产的地位确实不再一如既往神圣。许多国家仍然费力在联合国科教文组织的列表里赢得一席之地，随之而获取旅游暴涨所带来的利益，但是有些人开始质疑这种荣誉带来的长期的价值。在发达国家，有时会对外界的干扰感到愤怒；在其他地方，也正在深切的关注，这样的计划本来是要保护世界最伟大的财产，可能事实上却导致了他们的死亡。不足的资金和武器并不会比道德主权多多少，联合国科教文组织无法更多地帮助迅速膨胀的古迹数量——总数现在接近900个——它只能挑出与众不同的。“健谈的人有时都会有这样的感觉，如果谈话是目标，那么我们应该不去打扰这些地方。”皮特·福特，在联合国科教文组织工作的英国考古学家，说道。
问题是谈话并不总是目标。对国家政府和当地贸易者来说，一个世界遗产的排名代表着一个偏僻小镇可以变成旅游必经景点的市场工具。这种反响是很难阻止的。在中国的一个古老的西南方城市——丽江，自从1997年榜上有名以后，在十年里，每年参观的人数从17万攀升至46万。去年，联合国科教文组织的一项任务中提到：“商业利益驱动政府采取措施从而吸引和满足大量游客，折中了真实遗产的价值，而正是这种价值吸引参观者第一时间来到这里。”
同样的困扰也发生在吴哥窟，那里有大量庙宇，现在也是柬埔寨主要的旅游胜地。自从1992年该景点列为世界遗产之一，游客的数量从每年少于1万一跃至100万。现在，一个毫无规划而突然出现的城镇为了伺候每天应接不暇的游客而成长起来。更糟糕地是，当地酒店正在从地下库存截取水源，也正在威胁破坏庙宇本身。“成为世界遗产之一能够在5年期间增加10——500倍的参观者数量，”世界遗产基金组织的杰夫·摩根说道，“这不再是《弗洛姆旅游系列》中的一小段文字，而是突然之间变成了三页。如果一个景点没有做好准备，你就能让成千上万的人慢慢地毁了它。”
毫无疑问，联合国科教文组织能发挥积极的影响。这个组织在阻止更恶劣的破坏上能够拥有谨慎地效率，弗朗西斯科-巴达兰说道，他是巴黎的基地世界遗产中心主任，参加遗址的挑选工作。如果没有高速路破坏这个景色对着日落就能看到吉萨大金字塔，游客会感激来自联合国科教文组织压力。巴达兰也承认，“我们能提供更多层次的保护，但是永远都无法做到十全十美。
资源在不断地扩展。世界遗产中心仅雇用不到100人，它每年拥有2000万美元的收益，包括捐赠在内，没有剩余资金帮助贫穷国家对抗来保护这些遗产。“它需要10倍的资金。”摩根说道。
某些国家当局憎恨联合国科教文组织的干预。联合国科教文组织会列为世界遗产的地方，他们认为都是濒危的古迹，在极端的例子中，把他们一起挖出来——作为一种惩罚在这个项目进行的37年中只有过两次。除了德雷斯顿以外，2007年，在阿曼的一个大羚羊保护区工人罢工，是因为政府为了允许石油开采而减少公园的面积到90%。1995年，联合国科教文组织决定列黄石公园为濒危古迹的名单上，在一个私人公司提议在附近开采黄金后，加强美国对联合国干预的不信任——帮助解释为什么美国没有成功地通过任何新地区的申请。
一种选择可能是限制名单，把资源集中到最有需要的地方。在过去的五年里，联合国科教文组织增加了100多个景点——包括今年13个——只有慢慢改变这种观念，评论家说，“名单越长，名声也就越小。”世界文化遗产基金乔纳森·富伊尔说道。它已经很难看到像冰岛附近的火山岛，纳米比亚的岩石画以及悉尼歌剧院这样的古迹群了。
国家之间的竞争——意大利和西班牙为了大量的古迹进行了长期的竞争——已经强迫联合国科教文组织限制每个国家新提名的数量只能是一年两个。然而，联合国科教文组织强烈渴望鼓励更多的申请从欧洲周围和北美——回到一半以上的古迹——到修正所看到的只是一种西方的偏见。有过失可能正是一种来突显古迹的特殊价值的办法。最后，保护祖先留下遗产的美好愿望可能在将来变得默默无闻。