national

UNESCO officials inspect Kamakura for World Heritage Site consideration

24 Comments

A panel of experts from UNESCO inspected Kamakura on Tuesday as part of a process to decide whether or not the city will be listed as a World Heritage Site.

In February, the Japanese government submitted a request to UNESCO to register Mt Fuji and Kamakura as World Heritage sites in 2013.

The education ministry said that Mt Fuji has religious significance and artistic value because of its numerous depictions in ukiyoe woodblock prints.

The ministry nominated Kamakura for its historical importance as the seat of Japan's first shogunate administration of samurai.

Japan already has 16 sites registered as World Heritage cultural sites, including the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, Himeji Castle, shrines in Kyoto, Nara and Nikko, as well as the Ogasawara Islands.

Members of the inspection team are part of UNESCO's advisory body, the International Council on Monuments and Sites.

© Japan Today

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

24 Comments
Login to comment

Hasedera in Kamakura should be listed. It is stunning.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Why not just label all of Japan a World Heritage Site and be done with it?

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

Why not just label all of Japan a World Heritage Site and be done with it?

Because that would be silly.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

@smithinjapan

yes, I agree. I find Japan's aggressive World Heritage campaign really annoying. Remember the silver mine designation? It was like a hole in the ground. Not quite the Pyramids or Angor Wat.

In Kamakura, the road leading the Buddha is choked with vehicle traffic, including large industrial trucks. If the authorities were serious, they'd turn it into pedestrian route and plant some trees and grass, or create boulevards and a causeway along the coast. On weekends, that part of Kamakura is a nasty ordeal to travel through.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

JeffLee: You don't seem to know much about how heritage sites are chosen. The Silver mine is actually very relavent to the heritage of Japan and is quite a beautiful and interesting spot to visit. I have been to other heritage sites and felt less impressed by them (no information, poor upkeep, not knowing it was even a heritage site)

Also, other heritage spots are just as crowded with traffic...have you ever been to the Taj Mahal in India? Or some of the sites in Central America? Even the Rocky Mountains in Canada can be a nightmare. I don't think the people who evaluate the sites really care about the congestion around it if it has a great significance to the heritage of that country.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

It's insane that Mt.Fuji is not a UNESCO site yet. I am shocked.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Mt. Fuji might not be around much longer though...looks to be doing what Mt. St. Helen did in 1980

0 ( +1 / -1 )

While the J policy to have more sites listed as world heritage may look aggressive, this is a result of the fact that until several years ago Japan did not invest in inbound tourism and showed no interest in promoting itself as a travel destination. It did not invest in developing the necessary for inbound tourism infrastructure. Late though it was, the government eventually realized that the country has potential as a travel destination but it actually lacked many of the necessary “assets” to attract foreign visitors. Japan has great historical sites but many of them are not listed as world heritage and thus they might not appear on the radar of foreign tourists. World heritage sites are also a great advertisement for a country trying to establish itself as a travel destination for foreigners.

Many other countries have been submitting sites for inspection by UNESCO in hope to advertise their cultural heritage in yet another way so for a country which only recently opened its eyes to the potential of inbound tourism, Japan is doing the right thing.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

sakula: "JeffLee: You don't seem to know much about how heritage sites are chosen."

The point I was making, and Jeff somewhat backed up, is that if you threw a stone in Japan it would land on a proposed Heritage Site. Everyone here seems to want SOMETHING in their area made a WHS, and in some cases it seems that way only so that they can say it is. I've never seen people more proud than when they talk about visiting a "UNESCO World Heritage Site". Now, don't get me wrong, some of the places DESERVE the status and the money that comes with it (for preservation), and Japan has a lot of beautiful and important sites, but the point is that there are TOO many requests for things here to become WHS.

Probie: "Because that would be silly."

Ya think? But it seems with all the requests that what some people here would have.

And I agree with one poster above that Fuji could be a problem if it explodes. Otherwise I think it would make a great natural WHS.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Smithinjapan: Yes, and no... There are a lot of places around Japan that would like to be listed as a site but so far there are a limited number actually being recomended by the government (my city and it's castle is one of them) They can ask the UNESCO commitee to view them and then they may or may not be selected for a varitey of reasons. Japan has about a dozen sites that the government would like to promote. Canada has about the same amount (both official and requested) sites as Japan. I don't think Japan is over doing it but rather trying to promote these sites to have more knowledge about certain elements of Japanese culture. It also can raise awareness to people outside of Japan about certain Japanese heritage. The silver mine is a perfect example...I would have never thought of Japan as a mining country until I read about the UNESCO site in Matsue.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

What this means is that the owners and residents of all buildings (including private homes) will need to go through hordes of paperwork and pay exorbiant fees (all going to UNESCO in Switzerland) if any repairs, renovations or upgrades are too be done.

For example, if a small homeowner within the UNESCO zone wishes to put up a fence they'll have to file the necessary paperwork and dish out the fees.

This will hit the small shop owners hard because as they get older and wish to sell off there stores and shops they won't be able to fetch a reasonable price because the new owner will be restricted by UNESCO rules on how the shop building is to be used.

For example, an old couple that owns a sausage shop won't be able to sell their shop easily because any potential buyer would have to keep the shop in relatively the same state, or else pay huge fees to the cronies in Switzerland to get approval to change the shop to a restaurant or something like that.

In a manner of speaking, a UNESCO approval is a de facto takeover by the UN as jurisdiction over the area is ceded to UNESCO.

So even if the Japanese government wished to build a police station it would need approval from Switzerland before doing so. Why put the Swiss in charge of Kamakura, it's a Japanese town in Japanese territory and should be administered locally by the residents, not by some elite group of European bureaucrats.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I don't understand how can places if beauty be a WHS. A place of beauty should have their own section. UNESCO should have places of outstanding beauty. As for The complaint of Europeans deciding what can and can't be done in Japan. Well if you want a WHS, it has to be in same state from now until they no longer want to be a WHS. for example you can't have WHS status then build a highway next to it. Personally, I don't see they point of wanting it. It's just another tick on a check list (every Japanese).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reza: they have that. There are 2 categories for UNESCO sites; cultural and natural. For example, the Canadian Rockies and the Great Barrier Reef are natural sites. They designate the sites in hopes to preserve them as well as promote them and their great characteristics around the world.

I am a big sucker for UNESCO sites due to my anthroopology and achaeology education.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is nothing new. They've been trying to get Fuji listed as one for ages. Keep getting turned down because of too much garbage on the mountain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I was in Kamakura last year... it's stunning... all of those wonderful temples and shrines, plus the great big buddha. I'd vote for it ^_^

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@sakula An inspection by the International Council of Monuments a few years ago found that the Iwami silver mine had "no outstanding universal value." Also, a Japanese magazine poked fun at the designation, mainly how thousands of tourists were queing up to see to a hole in the ground right after the listing was announced.

I agree that Japan's medieval silver trade was interesting, but a WHS need to be outstanding, as in awe-inspiring.

As for Canada...it's about 1,000 times bigger than Japan, so if anything it should many, many more WHS, for the fact that there many many more places there in the first place. Japan is a small country whose physical history was largely wiped out by wartime bombing and a postwar construction industry whose measure of success was how much concrete it could use to cover the land. Many of Japan's "ancient castles," in fact, are made from postwar-era concrete.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I still think the silver mine is incredible and very important to the history of Japan...thus a heritage site, not a monument (which I am assuming is what the council of monuments evaluates) It may not be the most interesting site, but it is culturally relevent. It is far more than a hole in the ground if you read the info about it. Just like Notre Damn is more than a church and the Taj Mahal is more than just a tomb of some dead woman.

And for comparing Canada to Japan you would also have to take into account the population density of the country over a significant amount of time. Japan has populated more of the land over a greater amount of time than Canada. A lot of first nations were nomadic, and wouldn't have permanent buildings that could be designated as heritage sites. However, places like Buffalo Smashed In National Park does pay homage to their hunting techniques that nearly wiped out the buffalo. I compared the 2 just to show that it isn't just Japan trying to get more sites designated at UNESCO sites.

I know Japana has a lot of reconstucted castles, hence why they are not all designated heritage sites. But stating that bombing destroyed everything is stretching it..all you have to do is see a bit of the country (or travel in Europe) to know that not everything was carpet bombed.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Just like Notre Damn is more than a church and the Taj Mahal is more than just a tomb of some dead woman.

If those buildings had been physically destroyed and completely rebuilt in 1955 -- as happened to Kyoto's Kinkakuji, which UNESCO lists as one of the "Historic Monuments of Ancient Kyoto -- they would never have been made WHSs.

But stating that bombing destroyed everything....

Misquote! I said "largely," not everything, and blamed construction as well.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

JeffLee: some sites were designated at WHS after being rebuilt after WW2. For example, the historic city center of Warsaw. Also, if a person does some traveling around Japan, they can find loads of places that were not bombed or covered in concrete. Perhaps you should go for a trip to see for yourself. I'm quite sure that the nature surrounding the silver mines or some of the other sites in the Tohoku area would be a great way for you to understand more about Japan and UNESCO sites.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hasedera in Kamakura should be listed. It is stunning.

It's a dump. Just a pile of old stones.

Is all this naming as world heritage something to do with preparing for the Olympic bid?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

shoifuki: has nothing to do with the Olympic bid. Japan usually asks the UNESCO commitee to review a few places every year. Last year 2 new UNESCO sites were designated in Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan is a small country whose physical history was largely wiped out by wartime bombing and a postwar construction industry whose measure of success was how much concrete it could use to cover the land.

I am afraid I have to politely disagree. The internet may not have offered you the knowledge to base your assumptions on. To open your eyes leave your PC station and visit the Tohoku region, the Japan Sea coast, Sado shima, the islands in the Inland Sea, the country sites of Shikoku, tiny islands in Okinawa - the list is almost endless - and you will encounter evidence of the forgotten past of the Edo, Meiji, Taisho and early Showa era in the form of retained architecture, crafts, art, communities and their customs. Discover Japan is not just a slogan, the things to discover are still there. You need to leave the beaten track. Not every spot needs or wants to be a UNESCO site, but many are worth a visit. They'll provide an insight into how people used to live, how they survived calamities, how they built their houses to withstand them, and see the surviving evidence of the towns and the interaction of the people.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It's a dump. Just a pile of old stones.

Unfortunate comment. Have you been there?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

dear presto345: many thanks for your polite and beautifully expressed tour around this beautiful country. Your English is of a very high standard, which cannot be said for American commenters like JeffLee (perhaps that's because he went to Notre Damn?). As for Kamakura's attempt to have some parts of the city recognised by UNESCO, I have lived here for 34 years and agree that many of the streets are a mess, being crowded with power poles and festooned with a jungle of overhead wires. Europe solved that problem 40 years ago. Japan still has a lot of work to do in that area.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites