Disadvantages Of Cultural Heritage

According to the dictionary: "Cultural heritage is the legacy of physical science artifacts and intangible attributes of a group or society that are inherited from past generations, maintained in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations." Because of its fragility, cultural heritage must be constantly preserved and valorised, UNESCO, the United Nation Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, was created in 1972 for this very reason, it included the preservation of cultural and natural sites, in 1991 intangible heritage made it to the list, as well. UNESCO's world heritage list has been widely acclaimed, and even described as the "equivalent of a Michelin Guide 5-star rating". However, we must ask ourselves, is

One of the main positive aspects is the attention given to a particular listed place. This is particularly advantageous for little known cultural heritage sites, as it attracts private donors, main stakeholders, and therefore different financial resources, but also an increase in tourism, general public attention, especially linked to the media, which may be favourable to local communities and boost their pride as well. As a matter of fact, I believe local communities are often overlooked in regards to this process, too. However, this might not always be the case, and this specific benefit is completely irrelevant when it comes to already well-known sites, such as the Colosseum, Taj Mahal or Acropolis. Moreover, another positive point that comes with public attention is the income of tourists, attracted by UNESCO's relevance. Nonetheless, tourism might not be as positive of an effect as we think, for instance, the cases of Venice or Amsterdam immediately come to mind, these overcrowded European cities are being destroyed by tourism, instead of benefitting from it, in Bali, as well, tourism is becoming an issue. Not only this, but also the influence the List has on tourism is not as relevant as one might think. As a matter of fact, the UNESCO World Heritage List is not one of the main factors that drives tourism, as most do not investigate whether a particular city has sites

Undoubtedly, political influence and national interests play a decisive role in the decision-making process, empirical strategies do not completely rule biases intrinsic to the nomination and selection of World Heritage sites.
As we've seen the World Heritage List hides different current issues, however, UNESCO will have to face different future challenges, as well. The main one, arguably, is overextension, more and more sites are being included on the list, and will be in the future, however, the value and significance of the listing decrease with time. Moreover, the gap between available resources and needs will widen as the number of sites on the list increases, too.
To conclude, as it was mentioned in the essay, UNESCO and the World Heritage List have both positive and negative aspects. Nevertheless, I believe the cons outnumber the pros. The list, especially, is not beneficial to the heritage it is meant to preserve. Moreover, because of overextension, it is destined to become completely unsustainable, as more and more sites are added, the less meaning and importance the list will have, and its main objective will be