The massive development programs in National Strategic Tourism Areas, especially at the Borobudur and Komodo National Park super-priority areas, has triggered the worst possible risk, namely the revocation of their world heritage status by UNESCO.
The World Heritage Committee (WHC) during its 44th session in Fuzhou, China, from July 15 to 31, urged the Indonesian government to postpone all development projects in and around the Borobudur Temple until after the completion of revisions to the Heritage Impact Assessment, the Management Plan for the Borobudur Temple Compound (MP), the Integrated Tourism Management Plan for Borobudur-Yogyakarta-Prambanan (IT-MP BYP) and the Borobudur Visitor Management Plan (BVMP).
There is a possibility that one or more project proposals or plans will be discontinued altogether, considering the potential negative impact on the authenticity, integrity and outstanding universal value (OUV) of the “properties”.
Also read:
> Borobudur Spurs Opening of New Economic Zones
> Reopened Borobudur Temple Relieves Boredom
The WHC\'s warning is related to the status of Borobudur as a world cultural heritage site based on a UNESCO decree in 1991. In addition to Borobudur, the recommendation for the temporary suspension of tourism development projects in and around world heritage sites also included Komodo National Park area and the cultural landscape area of Subak in Bali.
From the perspective of property rights theory, the existence of world heritage status on public property inherited from our ancestors – both cultural and natural, such as Borobudur and Komodo National Park – does not cause us to lose the right to use these properties as tourist areas and in economic development strategies, nor does it nullify the right to acquire foreign exchange earnings and tourism income from the property.
Development in and around areas that threaten the integrity of world heritage properties would mean actions that do not protect, especially without a recommendation from UNESCO.
On the contrary, this status gives us no right to abandon these places and makes us obligated to care for and protect them, with or without UNESCO\'s assistance. Development in and around areas that threaten the integrity of world heritage properties would mean actions that do not protect, especially without a recommendation from UNESCO.
Risk of status revocation
Our commitment to inclusive and sustainable tourism and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) vis-a-vis the massive realization of the national strategic tourism area development program (KSPN) is being tested with the possibility of the revocation of the status of Borobudur and Komodo National Park as “world heritage” by UNESCO. In fact, it is precisely this status that is the raison d\'etre for the development of the area and a mainstay for promotion.
Liverpool has experienced the risk of revocation of world heritage status due to development of the city waterfront, which has caused an irreversible loss of attributes, namely a negative impact on authenticity, integrity and extraordinary universal value. The development was carried out by demolishing the Bramley Moore Dock, which opened in 1848, among other changes. UNESCO awarded Liverpool world heritage status in 2004 because of the port city\'s role in world trade in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Uniqueness, on the one hand, is a prerequisite for tourism development, especially world-class properties such as Borobudur and Komodo National Park. This uniqueness is sold and promoted to various parts of the world so that foreign tourists are interested in visiting the places.
This uniqueness is substantially identical to the OUV as intended by WHC/UNESCO, which defines OUV as an important cultural and/or natural significance that is very "exceptional" because it transcends national boundaries and becomes the common interest of today and future generations of all men.
The Borobudur-Mendut-Pawon area, for example, with Borobudur as the largest temple in the world, meets three criteria.
To become a world heritage site, a property must meet at least one of ten criteria. The Borobudur-Mendut-Pawon area, for example, with Borobudur as the largest temple in the world, meets three criteria.
The three criteria are (1) reflecting extraordinary creative work, in this case Buddhist architecture and monumental art (criterion i); (2) being an outstanding example of regional art and architecture between the early 8th and late 9th century (related to criterion ii); and (3) the extraordinary reflection of the central blending of ideas of ancestor worship and the Buddhist concept of attaining nirvana (criterion vi, related to criteria i and ii).
Komodo National Park meets two criteria (criteria vii and viii), namely an area of extraordinary natural beauty and aesthetics and an area that is a habitat for Komodo dragons. The natural beauty of Komodo National Park is the result of a combination of hilly savanna landscapes, pockets of green thorny vegetation, white sandy beaches, and blue seas among the rocks and is said to be “unquestionably one of the most dramatic landscapes in all of Indonesia”.
Also read:
> The Powerful Mantra in Borobudur
> The Thriving Mushrooms of Borobudur
The OUV that is inherent in each of these criteria is feared to be affected by the massive development of the KSPN, in addition to the integrity of its propertie (temples, national parks). In the case of the Borobudur-Mendut-Pawon super-priority area, the results of the
initial heritage impact assessment (HIA) show that KSPN projects can have an impact on the OUV of the world heritage property, particularly the setting and the landscape around the construction project, in the inter-temple area (the construction of gates, corridors, shafts, skywalks and parking and commercial areas) and within the temple area, namely the entrance to the temple (the concourse area).
Meanwhile, for Komodo National Park, the things that pose a threat to the OUV include infrastructure development on Rinca Island to welcome the Group of 20 (G20) Summit in 2023, as well as the construction of tourism facilities on Padar Island without notification of the WHC.
The best choice
Now we have to choose. Are we going to be like Liverpool, which in 2012 was listed as a “world heritage in danger” site but continued its development and in 2021 lost its world heritage status? Or like Venice, Italy, which responded with a ban on large cruise ships passing through the historical center of the city, to prevent Venice and its lagoon environment from being included in the list of “world heritage in danger” sites.
Working with UNESCO to find a solution may be the best option. Loss of world heritage status can have a negative impact, both on conservation aspects (the technical and financial support and supervision of UNESCO) as well as tourism promotion, and reactions from the world environmental community.
From the perspective of William F Lloyd’s 1833 tragedy of the commons hypothesis, as presented by Garret Hardin in 1968, the shared ownership of the global community (represented by UNESCO) of Borobudur, Komodo National Park and Subak, Bali, is of the resource in the form of OUV that attached to these world heritage sites. The rules of the game follow the 1972 World Heritage Convention and Law No. 11/2010 on cultural conservation.
Wihana Kirana Jaya, Professor of FEB UGM
(This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswoko).