In lieu of the environmental movement there is now a new agenda: cultural preservation. Just as our environment and resources are rapidly depleting and vanishing, so too are our many diverse cultures and identities throughout the entire world. With the rise of globalization our generation must be the vanguard in the struggle of preserving our international heritage – before it is lost to the throes of history.

Japan is currently leading the charge with its sense of urgency to preserve the vanishing, and is constantly promoting an image of itself as eco-friendly. Japan is the main advocate of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization – more commonly referred to as UNESCO – which is comprised of 193 Member States. It has a World Heritage committee who deems specific sites possess outstanding cultural and natural importance to the common heritage of humanity. And as of the beginning of 2007 there were a total of 851 of these World Heritage sites listed. Some of the more recognizable ones are the Great Wall of China, the Pyramids of Giza, and the Statue of Liberty. The majority of these sites, however, are obscure and much less recognizable.

Every single site still remains the property of the country in which it resides, but there is a sense of ownership in the international community and a shared responsibility to the rest of the world. The main purpose these World Heritage sites were developed were for the protection and conservation amidst our rapidly developing world. Yet the majority of these sites are listed under Japan or the United Kingdom, and often third-world countries or smaller sites are considered to be of less importance and not fully recognized. Oftentimes, even with the stringent criteria for admission as a World Heritage site, the selection process appears to be subjective. Furthermore, with already 851 (and still counting) one begins to wonder, “Is it all really necessary?”

Of course, those proclaimed as World Heritage sites receive substantial funds through UNESCO to maintain and upkeep them, so there is most definitely a positive benefit. However, with the number of sites still increasing, the honor of World Heritage status is beginning to lose its initial significance. It is also not so original anymore as it is much more commonplace. Moreover, when previously unknown sites are labeled as thus, there is an instant increase in interest by the tourist population as well as a rapid influx of visitors from abroad which can most certainly become a negative.

Many sites can attribute a lot of their charm to their original, pristine state – often untouched by humans. With rapid development, overcrowding, and human pollution the integrity of the site is lost and it is no longer in possession of its original beauty. Therefore, an argument can be made that declaring one as a UNESCO World Heritage Site may do more harm than good. Humans always leave an indelible mark wherever they go (usually unaware of the impact they have on the fragile environment), so it is unfortunate that an increased interest in a site of cultural importance often results in the destruction and/or modification of the original state. For instance, in Great Britain there has been an ongoing argument over whether or not the beautiful Cornwall coast with its craggy cliffs and wild allure should attain World Heritage status. For centuries, it has retained its appeal by the fact that humans have mostly left it alone; albeit for the developed tin mining regions of the southern Cornwall coast (which consequently has recently attained World Heritage status). Many oppose its integration into the World Heritage community for fear of development and tourism which inevitably draws large amounts of traffic.

It is unfortunate that attempts to preserve and maintain sites of cultural importance have effects that are the complete opposite of their initial intentions. It is also a sad fact that man-made and natural locales are required to be labeled in order to be protected, because it should be in our own interest to preserve what is vanishing for future generations to enjoy. UNESCO World Heritage status may be the catalyst for the ever-increasing rate that these awe inspiring sites are depleting, and should be either done away with or reconsidered before no more sites remain that are capable of retaining that status. Yet before that occurs, a question that we should all ask ourselves is: Is it imperative for such a title to exist in order for us to appreciate and respect our own heritage?