Electronic Periodic Reporting

1
Electronic Periodic Reporting

• Europe is pioneer in completion of electronic
  version of Section I in 2004/2005
• 100 of the States Parties prepared a report
• All answers are stored in a database
• 94 of the close-ended questions were answered
• An evaluation tool for statistical analysis was
  developed and used for synthesis reports
• "Year of Reflection" to be held in 2006/2007

2
Focal Points

• FPs often exchanged loss of know-how
• Loss of accuracy through translations
• Dispersion of information sources
• Lack of cooperation/understanding from people not
  directly engaged in PR
• PR is a time-consuming and labour-intensive
  process
• Respect the FPs and their work, give adequate
  feedback and follow-up!

3
Questionnaire

• Need for clearer and more concise formulation of
  the questions
• Inconsistencies in the questionnaire and between
  questionnaire and Explanatory Notes
• Problems with Tentative Lists/Nominations
• Parallel MS Word version is problematic
• Size of textbox answers to be discussed
• Demand for attachment of files

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Preparation of Tentative Lists
9
Tentative Lists
10
Most important perceived benefits of World
Heritage listing
11
Evaluation

• Electronic tool for statistical evaluation of
  answers
• Tables as basis for graphic visualisation
• Regional and/or sub-regional approach
• Possible integration of additional components
  into the electronic tool
• Follow the development of answers to PR over
  several cycles
• Access for WHC and experts only

12
Electronic Periodic Reporting
Data from WHC
13
Other Databases

• Sites (SQL)
• Site Managers (diverse)
• Tentative Lists (MS ACCESS)
• Nominations (SQL and MS ACCESS)
• Committee Decisions (MS ACCESS)
• Advisory Body Evaluations (scanned)
• SOC Reports (MS ACCESS )
• International Assistance (several MS ACCESS)
• Country/Site Data Sheets (could be result of DB
  query)
• DG Briefings (could be result of DB query)

14
Information Management

• Link and standardize different databases(a PR
  database and other separate databases make no
  sense)
• Neither data from States Parties nor from WHC are
  totally reliable
• Continuous exchange of updated information
  through the database
• Give access to other partners (e.g. site
  managers, Advisory Bodies, ...)
• Let SPs profit from the disposal of an updated
  and reliable database

15
Periodicity of Updating

• Depending on type of information
• Once at the beginning historical data
• According to statutory process (inscriptions with
  criteria, statements of significance etc., change
  of boundaries, names etc., new nominations, SOC
  reports, )
• Six year cycle (general assessments, proposed
  actions, statistical indicators, )
• Constantly (contact persons, addresses,
  inventories, projects, tentative lists, )

16
Type of information

• Statistical Data
• Measurability
• Electronic questionnaire
• and evaluation tool
• essential

• Qualitative Data
• Problems, comments,
• assessments, proposed
• actions
• Electronic questionnaire
• and evaluation tool
• possible
• But Danger of undervaluing the information!

17
Thank you for your attention

• For more details
• "Report on Electronic Periodic Reporting and
  Information Management
• Jorun Poettering