The 8th Annual Coordination Meetingof the UNESCO World Heritage-related
Category 2 Centres
31st May - 2nd June 2023
Sejong, Republic of Korea

Final Report

2

Table of Contents
Overview.......................................................................................................... 1
Background Information ...................................................................................................2
Objectives of the Meeting ...............................................................................................3
The Expected Results ..........................................................................................................4
Methodology of the Meeting .........................................................................................4

Outline of the Meeting ............................................................................... 6
Session 1 ...................................................................................................................................6
Session 2 ................................................................................................................................ 10
Session 3 ................................................................................................................................ 15
Session 4 ................................................................................................................................ 20
Session 5 ................................................................................................................................ 25

Conclusions and Resolutions of the Meeting ........................................ 27

Annex 1. Sejong Declaration .................................................................................................. 28
Annex 2. List of Participants ................................................................................................... 30
Annex 3. Pictures of the Meeting ......................................................................................... 32

1

Overview

Background Information

The Category 2 Centres related to World Heritage(C2Cs) are the organizations that contributeto the sustainable development of the World Heritage sites by enhancing conservation andmanagement and participating in policies and programmes agreed upon by the General
Assembly of States Parties to World Heritage Convention and World Heritage Committee.
In particular, the expectation of C2Cs role to provide professional knowledge and expertise to
all levels of stakeholders for the protection and management of World Heritage(44COM6, 14p)
that complies with UNESCO's "World Heritage Capacity-Building Strategy" framework is on
the rise.
Annual coordination meetings of UNESCO Category 2 Centres and Institutes (UNESCO C2Cs)
dedicated to World Heritage foster the sharing of expertise, synergy development, andexchange among the centers. These gatherings are in accordance with Resolution 17 GA 9
(UNESCO, 2009) of the General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention,
which initially called for the organization of the inaugural meeting. Subsequently, the UNESCO
C2Cs strongly recommended the continuation of these yearly meetings. These gatherings
provide a valuable platform for interaction and exchange with the Advisory Bodies and theWorld Heritage Centre (WHC), focusing on topics aligned with World Heritage Committee
Decisions, such as the World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy and Resolutions approvedby the General Assembly.
Since 2010, a total of seven Annual Coordination Meetings have taken place with the aim ofenhancing cooperation among C2Cs worldwide and promoting the effectiveness and unity of
their endeavors through the exchange of expertise and experiences. However, following the2

7th Annual Coordination Meeting in 2019, subsequent gatherings have been postponed dueto the ongoing pandemic.
However, in recognition of the need for international cooperation to alleviate various threatson World Heritage sites, the International Centre for the Interpretation and Presentation ofWorld Heritage Sites under the auspices of UNESCO (WHIPIC) cordially volunteered to hostthe 8th Annual Coordination Meeting in 2023.
Thus, the 8th Annual Coordination Meeting of the UNESCO World Heritage-related Category
2 Centres was held between May 31st and June 2nd in Sejong, Republic of Korea on thepremises of WHIPIC. The meeting was attended by representatives from the UNESCO Beijing
Office ICOMOS, IUCN-ICCROM, benefiting as well from the online participation of a UNESCOWorld Heritage Centre representative. In addition, the meeting was attended byrepresentatives from the following C2Cs:⚫

African World Heritage Fund (AWHF)⚫

Arab Regional Centre for World Heritage (ARC-WH)⚫

International Centre on Space Technologies for Natural and Cultural Heritage (HIST)⚫

World Heritage Institute of Training and Research-Asia and Pacific (WHITR-ap)⚫

Regional World Heritage Institute in Zacatecas (IRPMZ C2C)⚫

World Natural Heritage Management and Training for Asia and the Pacific Region Wildlife Institute of India (WII – C2C)⚫

Regional Heritage Management Training Centre ‘Lucio Costa’ (IPHAN)⚫

International Centre for Rock Art and the World Heritage Convention⚫

International Centre for the Interpretation and Presentation of World Heritage Sites(WHIPIC)

Objectives of the Meeting3The main objective of the 8th C2C Annual Coordination Meeting was to revitalize thecollaboration among C2Cs that was disrupted by the pandemic. This meeting aimed toestablish a proactive cooperation system and build a common mission for strengthening andenhancing solidarity that meets with the core principle guiding actions of UNESCO (41C/4,
4p).
In accordance with UNESCO's Medium-Term Strategy (41C/4), Strategic Objective 3 andOutcome 5, "Protection and promotion of the diversity of heritage and cultural expressions,"
the Meeting explored ways to apply an inclusive approach to the interpretation andpresentation of world heritage in all activities and projects that C2Cs will undertake in the
future.

The Expected Results⚫

Reidentify the roles and functions of C2Cs and set a common direction for futurecontributions to the protection of World Heritage sites.

⚫

Establish short-term strategies for C2Cs to narrow the gap between the public and World
Heritage sites that have been separated by Covid-19.

⚫

Develop strategic roles for C2Cs in the World Heritage Committee.

⚫

Adopt a Declaration for cooperation and solidarity among C2Cs.

Methodology of the Meeting4The two-day meeting was organized in five sessions, excluding the opening session, and was
followed by a field trip to the Capital Fortifications of Hanyang, the National Museum of Korea,
and the Changdeokgung Palace Complex. The first session was moderated by a representativeof WHIPIC and focused on World Heritage Interpretation and Presentation, featuring four
presentations, each followed by a Q&A session or discussion. The second session wasconceived to function as a review of each C2Cs activities since the last Annual Coordination
Meeting and to update the participants on the successes and challenges each C2C had
encountered in the circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic. The third session gave
the floor to the Advisory Bodies’ representatives and produced a fruitful discussion between
C2C representatives and the IUCN-ICCROM and ICOMOS representatives. The fourth session
had a focus on the involvement of C2Cs in the third Cycle of Periodic Reporting, whereas thefifth session concluded the meeting with a final revision of the Sejong Declaration ofUnderstanding and Cooperation, as well as with the designation of the following meeting’sorganizers.

5Outline of the Meeting

Opening Session
The opening session commenced with an introduction of the participants, followed by a brief
welcoming remark from Ms. Suhee Chae, Director-General of WHIPIC.
Next, the participants viewed a recorded congratulatory message from Mr. Lazare Elondou
Assomo, the Director of the World Heritage Centre. Mr. Assomo highlighted the significanceof the current meeting for both being the first occurrence after the COVID-19 pandemic, butalso for the premiere of being hosted by the Republic of Korea. Mr. Assomo noted theopportunities for the C2Cs to connect, exchange knowledge, and strengthen the capacity of
C2Cs, which are made available through the Annual Coordination Meetings.

Session 1: Topic: World Heritage Interpretation and Presentation and The
Role of C2Cs
The session was moderated by Ms. Shim Haeree, Head of the Education and Networking
Office of WHIPIC, who also delivered a joint presentation with Ms. Sujeong Lee, Head of the
Research Office of WHIPIC on the topic of World Heritage interpretation and presentation
focusing on the role of WHIPIC in the implementation of the World Heritage Convention.
Ms. Sujeong Lee displayed the evolution of the concept of heritage throughout history, notingthat the current understanding of the term defines heritage as a core resource in sustainable
development, and stressed a need to expand the perception of heritage as a communitycentered cultural process. Ms. Sujeong Lee further presented the evolution of the concepts ofinterpretation and presentation and, the efforts made by WHIPIC to redefine these concepts
given recently emerging needs, cited by Ms. Sujeong Lee as “the credibility of the list,
sustainability, and the community”. Ms. Sujeong Lee also listed WHIPIC’s medium-term

6

projects in terms of research and development. She was followed by Ms. Shim who presented
WHIPIC’s capacity-building ongoing and future projects, both domestically and internationally.
Mr. Shahbaz Khan, the director of UNESCO Beijing Office appreciated that capacity-building
programs carried out by C2Cs internationally could have a more lasting impact if theycollaborated directly with UNESCO offices and with UNESCO Chairs, in terms of resources.
Mr. Ebrahim Al Khalifa, the Deputy Director of ARC-WH presented his congratulations andinterest in the upcoming projects and inquired about the vision of WHIPIC regarding capacity
building concerning criterion (vi). Ms. Sujeong Lee responded that WHIPIC is attempting toextend the way criterion (vi) is assessed in the dossier, and also how the physical remains canbe connected with it in the case of sites associated with conflict. Ms. Shim added that one
potential topic that could be tackled in the upcoming World Heritage Committee side event
planned by WHIPIC could be criterion (vi).
Mr. Mario Santana Quintero emphasized the importance of “credibility”, mentioning that the
aspect of credibility has to be linked with the actors and the target groups (advisory bodies,state parties, the community). Mr. Santana also stressed that criterion (vi) is essentiallyassociated with the aspect of justice and legal aspects, and raised the aspect of reconciliation.
Ms. Sujeong Lee stated that WHIPIC strives to take a neutral stance in terms of judgment andhave a future-oriented attitude.
Mr. Vusithemba Ndima noted that WHIPIC’s focus on youth may be helpful in order to build
a human resource for the future of cultural heritage. Regarding criterion (vi) and the issue ofreconciliation concerning heritage sites in areas of conflict, Mr. Ndima suggested that they
are central issues that require neutrality.
Ms. Claudia Feierabend Leal asked about the affiliations and exchanges of WHIPIC researchwith universities. Ms. Sujeong Lee mentioned that it is one of the future projects of WHIPIC
to collaborate with universities.

7

Following this discussion, Ms. Leal gave a case presentation under the subtopic of values
beyond OUV, such as the communities, that took precedence. In order to illustrate the issues
related to the topic experienced by the C2C from Brazil, three cases were chosen: Heritage
Education in the Fortification Context of Perambuco, Paraty and Ilha Grande - Culture andBiodiversity and Valong Wharf Archaeological Site, for which the representative identified two
key aspects necessary for analyzing the selected cases: the multilayered nature of World
Heritage, composed of narratives, meanings and the human factor on one side, and thepresent.
Heritage was defined as a fundamental concept underlying the concept of nation, a means to
produce visibility, and a resource used in redefining and challenging values and identities. Ms.
Leal continued by highlighting the importance of communities, and their impact on theStrategic Objective. The CLC representative concluded that the present meaning of a World
Heritage site may be not only a resource for redefining heritage discourse proposed by WHC,
but to also make an impact on the relationships with the territory.
The second case presentation was given by the representative of the International Centre forRock Art and The World Heritage Convention, Mr. Pablo Jimenez Diaz, who presented on the
topic of rock art management network promotion and fostering cooperation. Mr. Jimenez
introduced rock art as a part of cultural landscapes, being both a part of natural heritage andcultural heritage, and indicated the multiple connections between rock art and the population
living in the area, with intangible heritage, and how this brings about issues such as tourism
management and the environment. Mr. Jimenez stressed the importance of developing tools
and strengthening cooperation between stakeholders such as the communities, the local
authorities, national authorities, etc. The forces quoted by Mr. Jimenez as challenges to thecultural landscape were economic development, climate change, as well as migration and ruraldepopulation, and massive tourism.
Mr. Jimenez then listed a series of examples of cooperation between stakeholders - national,
regional, e.g. AMUFOR - Forest Municipalities Association - such as documents, and guides
devised to counter these challenges. Other methods listed by the representative were heritage
8

and landscape integration (replanting the landscape with the original flora), fencing, signaling,
and virtual guided sites, and the dissemination of information through means such as virtualexhibitions, interpretation, and dissemination centers, etc.
The third case presentation was given by Mr. Gautam Talukdar, the Scientist F and Nodal
Officer of the Wildlife Institute of India. Mr. Talukdar’s presentation focused on natural heritage,
but it drew attention to the importance of interpretation understood as “storytelling”, and to
the necessity to address the needs of the audience, highlighting the existence of many typesof tourists. The challenges occurring in natural heritage interpretation, as Mr. Talukdar noted,
are not limited to the characteristics of the audiences, but also of the natural heritage, finallyhighlighting intangible challenges such as cultural connections.
The representative of WII employed three case studies to illustrate the nature of therelationship between OUVs and the local communities. The cases presented were Sundarbans
National Park, the Khangcendzonga WHS, and the Keoladeo WHS, which were selected toillustrate the nature-culture linkage (i.e. religious connotations and everyday life and functions)co-occurring with other linkages that exist between the WHS and the communities.
This last presentation was followed by a discussion session.
Mr. Al Khalifa mentioned that in the case of the Arab Region, the main focus is on heritage
conservation and that the main projects undertaken by ARC-WH in collaboration with Member
States are related to impact assessments. Ms. Shim inquired about the possible benefits
interpretation could bring to the impact assessments. Mr. Al Khalifa agreed that interpretation
could play an important role in offering an alternative for developers, as well as regarding
tourism. Still, however, it is currently lacking and should be explored further. Ms. Sujeong Lee
expanded on the topic of impact assessments and noted the importance of attributes, on
which however currently there is no consensus and the relationship between them and HIAs
and EIAs.
Ms. Eugene Jo, the programme manager of ICCROM added that impact assessments havebeen supplemented with additional sections for values other than OUVs could be re-coded,
9such as national or local values. Ms. Jo also admitted the complications brought about by thelack of definition for the attribute. Ms. Jo also highlighted the importance of interpretation as
the connecting element between the OUVs, other values, communities, and management.
Mr. Talukdar illustrated the importance of interpretation for conservation with the example of
the Amur falcons in the region of Nagaland, in the case of which a change of narrative helped
protect a species.
Mr. Li Xin, the deputy secretary-general of WHITRAP, stressed the importance of research andnetworks, the conjoining of which could be achieved through technology, at a transboundary
level.
Mr. Carlos Augusto Torres Pérez, the director general of IRPMZ shed light on the issues theCategory 2 Centre in Zacatecas is facing, pinpointing the issue of risk management due tothe characteristics of the natural environment (earthquakes, floods, etc.), and he noted thatinterpretation is of great importance due to the links between the identification of the values
and their conservation.

Session 2: Topic: Review of C2Cs’ Individual and Joint Activities (20192022): Difficulties and Progress in the Context of COVID-19
The session was moderated by Mr. Al Khalifa and commenced with a presentation alsodelivered by Mr. Al Khalifa as the representative of the C2C which had hosted the 7th Annual
Coordination Meeting.

Mr. Al Khalifa briefly reviewed the background, the attendees, the objectives, the methodology
and the conclusions, and the resolutions of the 7th Annual Coordination Meeting in order torefresh the participants’ memories of the meeting hosted by ARC-WH in Bahrein in 2019.

Mr. Khan asked about the communication mechanism between the C2Cs since the last
Coordination Meeting, to which Mr. Al Khalifa responded that it had been taking place on a10

bilateral basis while specifying that in the pre-pandemic period, the C2Cs would convene twicea year, the second time on the margins of the World Heritage Committee.
Mr. Khan suggested that coordination is enhanced by the creation of a newsletter,recommending that centres with access to more resources may take this role on a permanentor rotating basis.
Following this introductory presentation, the floor was taken by the representative of theAfrican World Heritage Fund, Mr. Ndima, who gave a presentation about the history of The
African World Heritage Fund, its mission and vision, its past activities and modus operandi,
the specific challenges the African region is facing, as well as achievements and projects
initiated and carried out during the 2019-2022 period. The activities performed by the AWHF,
such as trainings and skill development in tentative listing and World Heritage nomination
through mentorship and technical field assistance and grants brought about 3 new inscribed
properties and 13 complete nomination dossiers.

Following the African World Heritage Fund, the deputy secretary general of HIST, Mr. Shaobo
Liu took the floor and introduced Space Technologies for World Heritage Conservation
through a review of the activities of HIST since the last Annual Meeting. In the past four years,
HIST carried out several conservation projects including the UAV-based optical remote sensing
survey in Bagan World Heritage Site, the monitoring land cover and environmental changes
around heritage sites along Silk Roads: Routes Network of Chang’an-Tianshan Corridor, andan emergency monitoring, and assessment of the potential impact of the super tropical
cyclone Harold on the East Rennel WHS. In addition, HIST has been monitoring natural andmixed heritage sites as part of its scientific research and its case report has been included ina 2022 report regarding big earth data released by the Chinese MOFA. Based on theseresearches, HIST has written and published four books, one of which is Introduction to Space

Archaeology, the first book of its kind dedicated to reviewing space information technology
applications for archaeology.

11Mr. Liu also shared that HIST has organized more than 20 events during the 2019-2022 period,
the HIST-IUCN side event on the margins of the 44th Session of the World Heritage
Committee being the most noteworthy event, with which HIST signed an MOU in 2022. In
addition, HIST organized 4 training workshops for 300 site managers from 13 countries.

The next presenter was Mr. Carlos Augusto Torres Perez. Mr. Torres Perez briefly recounted
the history of the Centre, acquainting the audience with the mission, objectives, and lines ofaction of the centre and with the parameters that define World Heritage-related issues in thesubregion of Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. Mr. Torres Perez then proceeded
to recount the events that took place in the 2019-2022 interval. In 2019, the IRPMZ
participated in 2 workshops: Basic Concepts of the Convention on the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972 and Towards a Regional Strategy for Updating andHarmonization of Tentative Lists in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. The centre
received a positive evaluation for its activities since its establishment from the WHC in
September 2021.

During the pandemic, the IRPMZ organized a series of online workshops using the platform#ShareOurHeritage. Finally, in the post-pandemic period, the IRPMZ presented its plans for
2023, which include strengthening cooperation between the countries in the region and their
participation in the activities of the centre, as well as strengthening the connections with
Centro Lucio Costa, ICCROM, and the WHC. In addition, Mr. Torres Perez presented theintention to develop a cooperation framework that aims to address capacity development
needs in the region by establishing a comprehensive action plan, optimizing existing resources,
and providing a multilingual capacity-building program.

The next presentation was delivered by the representative of Centro Lucio Costa C2C. Ms. Leal
began her presentation by offering a short review of the centre’s past activities, as well as ofits structure and modus operandi. Ms. Leal proceeded with a summary of the difficulties
encountered by the Brazilian centre due to internal political disturbances in the context of the12

Covid pandemic, which greatly affected cultural institutions and actors. The Lucio Costa
Centre’s budget had been drastically reduced to zero during the 2020-2022 period, whichhappened alongside a decrease in the workforce. The Lucio Costa Centre had to push backits Governance and Executive Board meetings during the pandemic period, however, it did
hold a workshop on Risk Management in Chile in 2022, and it offered technical assistance torepresentatives at the WHC Sessions in 2019 and 2021.

The centre expects a more optimistic situation for the upcoming period, as the budget has
been increased. The centre also is expected to undergo its evaluation from UNESCO in the2023-2024 period. Later in 2023 and 2024, the Centre has several capacity-building activities
planned, such as workshops on the 1970 Convention, on the World Heritage Tentative List,
on World Heritage Application, and risk management. In addition, the centre is performing
comparative research on risk management with Brazil, Cabo Verde, and Colombia, as well as
research on language diversity.

Next, Mr. Jimenez, the representative from the International Centre for Rock Art and the World
Heritage Convention, delivered a presentation that showcased the centre’s activities andchallenges during the recent period. Mr. Jimenez began his presentation with a short
introduction into the natural distribution of Spain’s rock art Heritage sites, and heconsequently familiarized the audience with the history of the C2C, revealing the difficulties
the centre has encountered in obtaining funding from the government, a reason from which
it has not been isolated from the Ministry of Culture. Another problem presented by Mr.
Jimenez is the federal form of administration of Spain and the fact that the sites are commonly
spread across more divisions.

Mr. Jimenez continued to present the objectives of the centre, its organizational structure, andthe activities it promotes, including international exhibitions.

13Following Mr. Jimenez, Mr. Li Xin, spoke about the projects and ventures of WHITRAP during
the past years. Mr. Li began his presentation by explaining the organizational structure of
WHITRAP and its activities. Mr. Li explained that the core activity of the centre, which is “TheGlobal Awards for WH Education Innovative Cases”, and theme activities, such as forums,
lectures, site events, online exhibitions, and publications. “The Global Awards for WH Education
Innovative Cases” had been initiated during the 44th World Heritage Committee in 2021, andit aims to showcase and promote successful cases of educational programs, materials, orapproaches that contribute to raising awareness and understanding of World Heritage sites
and their significance.

As for the theme activities, Mr. Li listed a series of online activities that had taken place in
2022, such as the World Heritage and Urban Sustainable Development Conference, and World
Heritage Cities Exhibition. Regarding its upcoming projects, WHITRAP is anticipating the 2023
World Heritage Creative Innovator Forum, which will take place in Zhengzhou.

Ms. Heba Aziz delivered the next presentation reviewing C2C activities during the 3-year hiatus.
The director of ARC-WH joined the conference online and ensured the participants of the
support of the Arab Regional Centre for any decision that will be taken during the Meeting.
Ms. Aziz then briefly introduced the Arab Regional Center and highlighted the characteristicsof the Arab region and the distribution of heritage sites in the area.

Ms. Aziz also noted that the majority of the centre’s activities consist of workshops, public
events and lectures, technical and financial assistance, and conference participation. The center
also is preoccupied with translating guidelines from the WHC and from the Advisory Bodies,
as well as the centre’s own publications, related to which Ms. Aziz announced the recent
agreement with Springer, which would ensure a better distribution.

Regarding the technical assistance project, the ARC-WH representative listed 3 rehabilitation
and restoration projects in Yemen and Socotra, as well as financial assistance to Lebanon. The

14

centre has undergone several capacity projects in the 2020-2022 period in Yemen, Algeria,
the UAE, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, focusing on risk management, conservation, preparation of
Tentative lists, the nomination process, the statement of the OUV and Impact assessments,
among others. The centre has also partnered with the UNESCO chair for World Heritage andSustainable Tourism Management in the Arab Region, which has several projects, including amaster’s programme on WH management.

The final C2C to deliver a presentation was The Wildlife Institute of India, represented by Mr.
Gautam Talukdar. Mr. Talukdar proceeded to elaborate on the types of technical assistancethe centre has offered during the 2020-2022 period, such as nomination dossier preparation,
documentation of sites, review of nomination dossiers, the inclusion of sites in India’s Tentative
List 2021, and consultations on new sites. WII has also played a role in reporting andmonitoring natural heritage sites, as well as offered advisory services to governments, andstate parties, as well as providing inputs for the IUCN World Heritage Outlook 2020, among
others.
Mr. Talukdar also presented several new initiatives that the centre is planning to undertake,such as short training modules on topics such as the nomination process, climate change,
stakeholder engagement, nature-culture linkages, etc, as well as a 45-day long certificate
course in heritage management.
Regarding the challenges during the COVID-19 period, WII, according to Mr. Talukdar, has
not suffered such a decrease in funding as was experienced by Centro Lucio Costa. However,the post-pandemic recovery is slower and may take years to normalize.

Ms. Aziz suggested that a C2C meeting on the margins of the World Heritage Committee
session in Riyadh takes place and offered her support in organizing it. Ms. Aziz also suggested
that these meetings become regular.

15

Mr. Albino Jopela expressed his support for the organization of a rotative secretariat tomaintain a channel of communication, especially in view of the upcoming WHC session in
Riyadh.

Mr. Gautam Talukdar suggested that we request that the World Heritage Committee endorses
the Sejong Declaration.

Session 3: Topic: The World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy and theAdvisory Bodies’ Role

The session was moderated by Mr. Mario Santana Quintero.
Ms. Eugene Jo was invited to deliver a presentation as the representative of ICCROM and
IUCN. Ms. Jo commenced the meeting by introducing the World Heritage Leadership (WHL)
programme.

Ms. Jo, provided an overview of the WHL programme, highlighting its key objectives andactivities. The program aims to establish leading standards for conserving sites and promoting
their contribution to communities and sustainable development through engagement withWorld Heritage. Ms. Jo emphasized the establishment of a network of internationallyrecognized learning sites, including World Heritage sites demonstrating leading practice, toserve as platforms for learning and capacity building. The program also focuses on building
international networks between nature and culture practitioners and institutions, connecting
on-the-ground practice with leadership at various levels.
Furthermore, as mentioned by Ms. Jo, the WHL program conducts training events, exchanges,
and capacity-building activities to support site managers, stakeholders, and national heritage
services in diverse States Parties. It encompasses four projects: Effective management: nature,
culture, and communities; Resilience; Impact assessment; and Learning networks. These
projects aim to provide guidance, advice, and resource materials on conservation policies and16practices, integrating the ICCROM-led Managing Cultural World Heritage manual with the
IUCN-led Managing Natural World Heritage manual. Through these initiatives, the WHL
program strives to enhance the management of World Heritage sites, foster sustainable
development, and facilitate international collaboration and knowledge exchange.

Mr. Ndima raised a question about the role Advisory Bodies play in relation to the destructionof cultural property. Ms. Jo clarified that there are no specific mandates for the Advisory
Bodies to act, but that an emergency response mechanism is organized together with the
WHC.

Mr. Khan addressed the issues of case studies and the relationships between education andculture. Concerning the case studies data collection issue, Ms. Jo referred to ICCROM’s
platform PANORAMA, which allows practitioners to share their experiences, and to theplatform recently launched by UNESCO, Canopy. Ms. Jo mentioned the research facilitated by
ICCROM for the research team from local universities and site managers, through the Heritage
Place Lab programme. Ms. Shim asked if the long-term plan of ICCROM is to allow sitemanagers to become capacity builders in their own right, and whether ICCROM is pursuingchanges at the policy level. Ms. Jo responded positively to both questions.
In his presentation, Mr. Mario Santana Quintero, Secretary General of ICOMOS, highlighted
the organization's role as an advisory body to the World Heritage Committee. He expressedgratitude for the event and acknowledged the individuals involved. Mr. Santana Quinteroemphasized the potential for collaboration between ICOMOS and the C2Cs represented at
the meeting. He also praised the efforts of WHIPIC and its staff. Mr. Santana Quintero provided
an overview of ICOMOS as a worldwide cultural heritage organization. He mentioned its
mission to advise UNESCO on matters related to conserving and protecting cultural heritage
sites. ICOMOS offers technical advice and expertise on World Heritage nomination, evaluation,and monitoring. It also provides guidance to site managers and local communities on bestpractices for heritage preservation.

17

Mr. Santana Quintero highlighted ICOMOS' contribution to developing ethical principles,
charters, guidelines, and resolutions for the preservation of cultural heritage sites. The
presentation emphasized the role of ICOMOS' scientific committees, working groups, andnational committees in conducting research, developing conservation theory, guidelines, andcharters, and fostering the international exchange of scientific information. Mr. Santana
Quintero mentioned specific working groups, including the Climate Action Working Group,
Emerging Professionals Working Group, and Our Common Dignity Working Group, which
focus on climate change, supporting emerging professionals, and addressing rights issues inheritage management, respectively. Mr. Santana Quintero highlighted ICOMOS' involvement
in initiatives such as heritage reconstruction, impact assessments, heritage alerts, and capacitybuilding workshops. He also mentioned ICOMOS' contributions to the evaluation of World
Heritage nominations, participation in monitoring missions, and assessment of requests forinternational assistance. The presentation concluded with a mention of various training
activities and other initiatives undertaken by ICOMOS. Overall, Mr. Santana Quinteroemphasized ICOMOS' dedication to the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage, its
advisory role to the World Heritage Committee, and its commitment to collaboration andcapacity building in the field of heritage conservation.
Ms. Nayeon Lee asked Mr. Santana Quintero about the most advisable strategy for WHIPIC in
its incipient stages of capacity building. Mr. Santana Quintero responded that cooperation
with ICOMOS National Committees is very important for C2Cs.
Mr. Khan lauded the issue of the differentiated cost of individual ICOMOS memberships
depending on the purchasing power of the respective country, but also raised the issue ofthe communication gap between the National Committees and other stakeholders; in addition,
he asked if there are supplementary benefits in the membership. Mr. Santana replied that thestandardization of membership requirements is a difficult task and that memberships ofcertain ICOMOS National Committees are disproportionate given the need.
Ms. Shim asked whether advisory bodies take a neutral stance in the case of wars and otherconflicts. Mr. Santana Quintero revealed that ICOMOS is not in the capacity to take an active
18

role, but only to provide technical assistance, as is the case through its collaboration with theBlue Shield. However, Mr. Santana Quintero specified that the stance of ICOMOS is not neutral.
Ms. Leal asked whether C2Cs should encourage the dissemination of the knowledge learned
through capacity building. Ms. Jo highlighted that the main focus of ICCROM is the trainingof trainers which endows them with the skills necessary to teach the content as well as thecontent itself. Mr. Santana Quintero noted that training sometimes may be a waste of timeand resources because the institution the trained professionals belong to may not be strong
enough, and he suggested that the focus should be shifted to strengthening heritage-related
institutions in developing countries.
Mr. Torres Perez highlighted the importance of the role of Advisory Bodies in the Latin
American and the Caribbean region, noting the contribution of ICCROM in the implementationof the national plan for strengthening capacities in Central America, the Caribbean, and Mexico.
Mr. Torres Perez also mentioned the importance of C2Cs in terms of capacity building. The
efforts to translate materials into Spanish were also mentioned. Ms. Jo agreed with theimportance of Spanish as the biggest language group, highlighting that some materials are
now produced directly in Spanish.
Mr. Jopela raised the issue present in the African region, which is the insufficiency of experts
participating in the processes and activities led by the Advisory Bodies, and suggested that
the C2Cs can participate in solving this issue. Ms. Jo agreed that the C2Cs can contribute to
identifying the specialists, and highlighted the importance of cross-pollination between
different regions, revealing that this process would be beneficial among the Advisory Bodies
as well.
Mr. Al Khalifa reminded the participants of ARC-WH’s capacity-building activity it had withICOMOS and highlighted the opportunity the trainees had to become observers at ICOMOS
in the future. Mr. Santana Quintero revealed that C2Cs have been instrumental in the activities
of ICOMOS.

19

Mr. Li Xin was given the floor, and he presented a video introducing the Global Awards forWorld Heritage Education Innovative Cases (AWHEIC), which is a global interactive platformthat emphasizes the advancement of educational models for World Heritage. It aims to serve
as a comprehensive resource and guide for practitioners involved in innovating World Heritage
education worldwide, facilitating effective leadership and promotion of future developmentsin this field. The event is directed by the National Commission of the People's Republic ofChina for UNESCO and co-organized by WHITRAP.

Mr. Li highlighted the importance of cooperation between C2Cs and suggested that theAWHEIC can be a first step in enhancing cooperation. Mr. Li accentuated the importance of
reducing the regional imbalance in terms of access to technology and stated that WHITRAP
wants to take an action in that sense. In addition, Mr. Li suggested that C2Cs engage in acommon project. Mr. Li also encouraged the co-organization of a side event at the 45th
Session of the World Heritage Committee.

Mr. Santana Quintero lauded the impact an award such as AWHEIC can have to stimulateinnovation, as well as the practical suggestions Mr. Li shared regarding C2C cooperation. In
addition, he suggested that while side events may be productive, C2Cs should also have theirmain events, such as the Annual Meetings.

Mr. Ndima asked what would be the first joint project the C2Cs could initiate. Mr. Li invitedthe participants to make suggestions. Ms. Leal mentioned the existence of several similarawards in Brazil and suggested that C2Cs could identify regional awardees to be nominatedfor AWHEIC. Mr. Liu added that each C2C has its own expertise and suggested that thedifferences can be utilized to a mutual benefit.
Mr. Khan raised the issue of the strategic choice of partnering institutions while having in
mind the resource aspect, suggesting feasibility studies that can be forwarded to funding
institutions.

20Mr. Talukdar manifested his support for Mr. Santana Quintero’s suggestion of focusing efforts
on strengthening institutions and suggested that the joint efforts of C2Cs concentrate on
strengthening the C2Cs as a whole. Ms. Shim asked Mr. Li about the sustainability of theaward and if it can be useful for wider audiences. Mr. Li explained that WHITRAP has a very
wide network and that cooperation is sought from many fields of expertise.

Mr. Santana Quintero stressed the importance of the democratization of digital technologies,
and their relevance for heritage, but mentioned that the benefits do not justify the investment
in certain cases. Mr. Santana Quintero concluded the session by highlighting the importanceof finding common ground, of finding ways to pool resources, and that C2Cs and the ABs cancooperate in continuous conservative efforts related to existing World Heritage sites.

Session 4: Topic: Periodic Reporting: The Involvement of UNESCO C2Cs in
the Third Cycle

This session was moderated by Mr. Shabhaz Khan, Director of UNESCO MS Regional Officefor East Asia. Mr. Khan gave the floor to Mr. Valentino Etowar, Periodic Reporting Coordinatorat the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, who joined the meeting online.

Mr. Etowar gave an overview of the statutory process of Periodic Reporting. He began his
presentation by outlining the origins, objectives, and modus operandi of the Periodic
Reporting process. Next, he highlighted the new aspects and characteristics added during theThird Cycle of Periodic Reporting, such as sustainable development, a new analyticalframework, synergies with other conventions and the inclusion of positive factors affecting
the property, and the inclusion of new training materials. Mr. Etowar highlighted the disparity
between regions in terms of state parties, on one hand, and the number of World Heritage
properties, on the other.

21

Mr. Etowar continued by explaining the timeline and the 5 stages of a reporting cycle:
reporting, submission, regional reports, regional action plans, and implementation. Next, helisted the actors and stakeholders involved. Mr. Etowar shared the submission percentages byregion, noting the possible reasons why the 100% target hadn’t been reached.

Mr. Etowar gave a review of the general tendencies observed in regional action plans, suchas representation and a more balanced World Heritage list, the need for Capacity Building,the establishment of networks, and a demand for action minding climate change andsustainability, as well as the inclusion of digital technologies.

Mr. Khan inquired about the availability of quantitative data and analysis. Mr. Etowar confirmedthat the data concerning the region the C2Cs belong to can be made available to them inorder to help their cooperation with State Parties.

Ms. Leal raised the question of synergies with other conventions and how they appeared in
the Reports, as well as other factors pointed out by the State Parties. Mr. Etowar affirmed that
the WHC is investigating the aspect of World Heritage sites having overlapping associations
with other conventions. He also mentioned that WHC has been requesting state parties toassess negative and positive impacts on local communities.
In response to an online request, Mr. Etowar demonstrated the ways in which C2Cs can accessthe datasets pertaining to Periodic Reporting.

Mr. Santana Quintero asked a question regarding the use of digital technologies andmonitoring, to which Mr. Etowar provided the example of the African Region Action Plan,
where, for example, the use of drones was considered important. It had been formulated by
the APA region as well, according to Mr. Etowar. Ms. Jo raised a question about the increasein the number of questions after the reflection period following the Second Cycle and asked
whether the reflection period following the Third Cycle triggered new strategic directions. Mr.
Etowar responded that the questions were pertinent despite the complications they brought

22about. In addition, he mentioned that the Periodic Reporting extends to all of the five UNESCO
conventions and is a subject being considered at the Secretariat.

Mr. Khan gave the floor to Mr. Al Khalifa, who proceeded to present on the topic of theinvolvement of ARC-WH in the Third Periodic Reporting Cycle. Mr. Al Khalifa gave a rundownof the previous two Periodic Reporting Cycles and highlighted the WHC's decision to welcome
the contribution of the ARC-WH to assist in facilitating the Periodic Reporting Exercise in the
Arab region. In relation to the Third Cycle, there has been an information session, four
workshops, collaboration with UNESCO WHC for the preparation of the narrative report andAction plan, an online national focal point meeting, and a follow-up meeting.

Mr. Al Khalifa highlighted the three priorities identified in the Arab region: attention on the
List of World Heritage in Danger; tentative lists, capacity building and cooperation in theregion, and support for the implementation of the 2011 HUL Recommendation. Mr. Al Khalifa
then presented the strategic objectives of the Arab region in detail.

The next presenter was Ms. Marie-Noël Tournoux, Project Director at WHITRAP, who joined
the meeting online. Ms. Tournoux delivered a presentation on the involvement of WHITRAP
in the 3rd Cycle of Periodic Reporting, noting that the WHC had invited C2Cs in the APA
region to support the periodic reporting exercise, following which WHITRAP and HIST planneda regional focal point meeting for 2020. However, due to the pandemic, all in-person meetings
were canceled, therefore in 2021, WHITRAP participated in several online training courses andworkshops.

Next, Ms. Tournoux mentioned a study undertaken by WHITRAP on the topic of the state ofconservation of APA sites from 2010 to 2019, including a 2021 update, which revealed themain threats and factors affecting WH sites, among which are building and development,social and cultural uses of heritage, but management issues were highlighted. Ms. Tournoux
presented a list of preliminary observations and outlooks, such as the need to showcase good23

practices; encourage the use of statutory instruments; translate into national languages andfurther research.

Representing the African region, Mr. Jopela delivered a presentation on the Third Cycle of the
Periodic Reporting and the involvement of the African World Heritage Fund. In 2019, theAWHF was involved in a preparatory workshop, the purpose of which was to discuss theformat and implementation strategy of the PR and review relevant resource materials. Laterin 2019, AWHF, the African group at UNESCO, and the WHC organized a side event on themargins of the 43rd Session of the World Heritage Committee; in addition, AWHF coorganized a launching workshop for the 3rd PR Exervise in Abidjan. In 2020, a Data Analysis
workshop was organized following the completion and submission of questionnaires, and atechnical coordination team from AWHF participated.

In order to reflect on the preliminary outcomes of the Third Cycle, the AWHF in collaboration
with regional offices, organized 4 sub-regional seminars in December 2021, and in February
2021, a final workshop presenting the results of the 3rd cycle of PR in the Africa region wasorganized by the UNESCO WHC in collaboration with the AWHF and UNESCO field offices.

The next presenter was Mr. Raul Eduardo Rodriguez Marquez, representing the Regional World
Heritage Institute in Zacatecas (IRPMZ C2C). Mr. Rodriguez Marquez introduced the LAC
region and its particularities and recounted the first two Periodic Reporting exercises and theiroutcomes. Mr. Rodriguez Marquez highlighted that an important meeting within theframework of the Second PR exercises was hosted at Zacatecas in 2012.

Regarding the 3rd Cycle, it was stated that the role of IRPMZ C2C has been relevant, not only
through its presence but also through its logistical, financial, and technical support. The IRPMZ
participated in the Meeting with Site Managers in November 2022 as observers, which took
place online. In February 2023, the IRPMZ participated in the consultation meeting withmanagers of World Heritage sites, and also in the Final Workshop of National Focal Points.

24

The main takeaways from the third Periodic Reporting Exercise have been presented as follows:in Section I, the benefits derived from the inscription of sites on the WH List; legal frameworks;
the function of World Heritage sites in the lives of communities, and the development ofcapacities. In Section 2, the factors with the biggest impact have been found to be
management and legal frameworks. The low participation of communities was noted, and theneed for financial assistance was noted, as well as for the improvement of the understandingof the World Heritage Convention.

Mr. Khan addressed a question about the differences in the results of the two sections, towhich Mr. Rodriquez Marquez clarified that the first section was filled out by focal points,
whereas the second was completed by site managers, which explains their difference in focus.
Mr. Santana Quintero expressed his personal opinion regarding the findings in Section 2 lackof verification and suggested that more substantial research is required. In addition, Mr.
Santana Quintero suggested that monitoring should be more technical and the data used ismore quantitative. Mr. Al Khalifa also noted the difference between the 2 sections in the Arabregion and attributed it to the difference in perspective between the focal points and sitemanagers, and suggested that site managers are kept informed through online means.

Ms. Sujeong Lee asked how the C2Cs can contribute to periodic reporting, especially WHIPIC,
through interpretation and presentation.

Ms. Tournoux stated that the power game between the local level and the state level isthrough management mechanisms, so the stakeholders are not necessarily the site managers.
Ms. Tournoux also added that the facilitation of documentation, i.e. translation andparticipation at a very small scale would be very helpful.
Mr. Rodriguez Marquez opined that interpretation could be complementary, and could be an
instrument that could enhance the processes of all stakeholders. He also suggested that C2Cs
should be seen more as facilitators.

25Mr. Al Khalifa suggested that further questions should be added to the questionnaire andrecommended that successful case studies of the interpretation of heritage should be
disseminated.

Mr. Ndima commented that the fact that site managers encounter difficulties in answering
their questionnaire, criticizing that it would be in their main interest, for the benefit of the site
and in terms of attracting the attention of governments. Ms. Leal opined that periodic
reporting is not only a means to obtain information but also a way to mobilize theparticipation of site managers. Mr. Jopela referred to the site managers' forum organized by
ICCROM, and noted a disconnect in the State of Conservation report, adding that it is a matterof interpretation and presentation, reminding of the difference in perspective between the
Focal Points and site managers. Mr. Jopela illustrated the role of interpretation by mentioning
the conflict between conservation and development.

Mr. Khan concluded Session 4.

Session 5: Topic: Future Strategies for C2C Interregional Cooperation

This session was moderated by Ms. Yeo Heekyung, Head of the Strategy and Planning Officeof UNESCO WHIPIC. The items on the agenda of this session were: Final Adoption of the
Sejong Declaration of Understanding and Cooperation among the UNESCO World Heritagerelated Category 2 Centres; Planning the 9th Annual Cooperation Meeting: theme, organizers,
etc.

Ms. Yeo recounted the series of online meetings that preceded the Annual Coordination
meeting, during which representatives of C2Cs provided WHIPIC with constructive feedback
in devising the meeting agenda. The last two meetings were draft group meetings, during
which the focus was on receiving and incorporating feedback from the participants.
26

Ms. Yeo proceeded to read the text of the Declaration.

Ms. Jo suggested that the term “rights-holders” is included in paragraph 2. Mr. Li asked toinclude mentions of the encouragement of common projects, in addition to “common
purposes”, which was added to paragraph 5 (d).

Ms. Leal raised attention to the term “voluntarily” in paragraph 4(a) because of its connotations.
The term was replaced with “effectively” at the suggestion of Mr. Khan. Paragraph 4 (c) was
first edited at Mr. Khan’s suggestion from “through enhanced reporting mechanisms” to “fortheir role in enhanced reporting”. Mr. Khan also suggested replacing the term “recognition”
with “visibility”, and “enhanced” with “dedicated”. Mr. Ndima suggested the addition of “therepresentatives of the Centre”, while Mr. Al Khalifa suggested adding “directly” in reference tothe World Heritage Committee.

Mr. Ndima suggested that “in a timely manner” is removed from paragraph 4(d).

Mr. Khan advised that “shared goals” is replaced by “shared resources” in paragraph 5 (b),and Mr. Ndima the change “by pooling resources”.

Ms. Yeo concluded the session by announcing that the participants have agreed on the final
form of the declaration, and proceeded with the final item on the agenda, the plan for the
9th Annual Coordination Meeting. Mr. Torres Pérez, the representative of IRPMZ manifested
the interest of the centre to host the coordination meeting in 2025.

27

Conclusions and Resolutions of the Meeting

The Annual Coordination Meeting of the UNESCO World Heritage-related Category 2 Centres
resumed after a four-year hiatus since the 7th meeting in 2019. The meeting served as achance to reignite dialogue between Category 2 Centres and bring them together following
the disruptions caused by the global pandemic.

Prior to the annual meeting, six preliminary meetings were held to identify common issues
related to the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. These issues were thendiscussed in five sessions during the annual meeting.

The most significant outcome of the meeting was the adoption of the Sejong Declaration ofUnderstanding and Cooperation among the UNESCO World Heritage-related Category 2
Centres (Sejong Declaration). This marked the first time that all Category 2 Centres made a
communal commitment.

The Sejong Declaration aims to elevate Category 2 Centres from being mere observers to key
actors within the World Heritage Committee. It also aims to enhance the visibility of theircontributions, which has been a topic of discussion in previous annual meetings. The
Declaration seeks to establish shared objectives to ensure that all activities and strategies
undertaken by Category 2 Centres are aligned.

The 8th Annual Coordination Meeting provided an excellent opportunity for existing andnewly established organizations to renew their partnerships. Participants expressed
anticipation for the ninth annual meeting, which is scheduled to take place in Mexico in 2025.
They also look forward to other multilateral opportunities to collaborate in the implementationof the World Heritage Convention.

28

Annex 1.
The Sejong Declaration of Understanding and Cooperation
among the UNESCO World Heritage-related Category 2 Centres
1. We recognize that the World Heritage Category 2 Centres are institutions that contributetowards strengthening sustainable development through the conservation and protection ofWorld Heritage properties within the framework of the World Heritage Convention and the
UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

2. We also recognize that the World Heritage Category 2 Centres are key actors in theimplementation of UNESCO's World Heritage Capacity Building Strategy to ensure thatstakeholders and rights-holders at all levels have relevant expertise to conserve and manage
World Heritage.

3. We recognize that all heritages are to be interpreted and presented based on theunderstanding of its natural and cultural components in a multifaceted and inclusive mannerreflecting diverse identities and experiences in various regions of the world.

4. We will strive to achieve the following common objectives:a. Provide capacity-building programmes to stakeholders at all levels including local
communities as key actors, so that they can participate effectively in the conservation andmanagement of World Heritage sites.
b. Understand the regional characteristics and recognize difficulties of conserving andmanaging World Heritage in each region, and seek solutions suitable for regional situations.

29

c. Improve the visibility of the contribution of Category 2 Centres to theimplementation of the World Heritage Convention, e.g. through dedicated reporting by the
representative of the Centres directly to the World Heritage Committee.
d. Strengthen and develop the expertise of the Category 2 Centres and get involvedin World Heritage working processes.
5. We will cooperate to achieve our common objectives as follows:a. Taking advantage of the geographical locations of Category 2 Centres around theworld, we will collaborate on implementing the Regional Capacity Building Strategy and its
Action Plans produced as a result of the Periodic Reporting of World Heritage.
b. Explore the possibility of implementing joint capacity building activities at a
multilateral level by pooling resources of the respective Centres.
c. In order to strengthen the capabilities of Category 2 Centres, annual seminarsofCategory 2 Centres shall be held to share best practices, knowledge, and expertise throughhybrid and in-person modalities, and personnel exchanges between institutions shall be
conducted if necessary.
d. Each Category 2 Centre, to the extent of its possibilities, will make its capacities
available to the other Category 2 Centres, in terms of support, to strengthen the cooperation
between Category 2 Centres and achieve common objectives, e.g. through joint projects in all
regions.
e. We will encourage the partners to join our efforts to identify World Heritage incooperation with the World Heritage Committee Advisory Bodies, and to support theconservation and management of World Heritage with State Parties, and other stakeholders,such as site managers, decision-makers and local communities.

6. We support the common objectives at the 8th Annual Meeting of the World Heritage
Category 2 Centres in 2023, and we commit to working on strengthening the cooperation
between the World Heritage Category 2 Centres to carry out the declaration in the future.

30

Annex 2. List of Participants

No.
1

2

3

Organisation

ParticipantsWorld Heritage Institute of Training and

Mr. Xin LI

Research for the Asia and the Pacific Region

Deputy Secretary-General

World Heritage Institute of Training andResearch for the Asia and the Pacific Region

African World Heritage Fund

Ms. Marie-Noel TOURNOUX
Project Director(Online)Mr. Vusithemba NDIMA
Chairperson
Mr. Albino Pereira de Jesus

4

African World Heritage FundJOPELA
Head of Programmes

5

Lucio Costa Regional Heritage Management

Ms. Claudia Feierabend LEAL

Training Centre

Deputy Director
Mr. Carlos Augusto

6

Regional World Heritage Institute in Zacatecas

TORRES PEREZ
Director General
Mr. Raul Eduardo

7

Regional World Heritage Institute in Zacatecas

RODRIGUEZ MARQUEZ
Specialist
Ms. Heba AZIZ

8

Arab Regional Centre for World Heritage

Director(Online)9

Arab Regional Centre for World Heritage

Mr. Ebrahim AL KHALIFA
Deputy Director

31

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

International Centre for Rock Art and the World

Mr. Pablo JIMENEZ

Heritage Convention

Head of Unit

International Centre on Space Technologies for

Mr. Shaobo LIU

Natural and Cultural Heritage

Deputy Secretary General

Centre on World Natural Heritage Management

Mr. Gautam TALUKDAR

and Training for Asia and the Pacific Region

Scientist F and Nodal Officer

International Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Suhee CHAE

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Director General

International Centre for the Interpretation and

Mr. Jaesoon LEE

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Deputy Director General

International Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Heekyung YEO

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Head of OfficeInternational Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Sujeong LEE

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Head of OfficeInternational Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Haeree SHIM

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Head of OfficeInternational Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Nayeon LEE

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

Senior Programme Specialist

International Centre for the Interpretation and

Ms. Madalina SOUCACU

Presentation of World Heritage Sites

InternUNESCO Beijing Office

Mr. Shahbaz KHAN
Director
Mr. Valentino ETOWAR

21

UNESCO World Heritage Centre

Coordinator(Online)22

ICOMOS

Mr. Mario SANTANA QUINTERO
Secretary General

32

23

ICCROM-IUCN

Ms. Eugene JO
Programme Manager

Annex 3. Pictures of the Meeting

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45