Twenty-five new sites added to World Heritage list, three inscribed already in danger

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee has inscribed 25 new properties on its list: 19 cultural, five natural and one mixed, in addition to the extension of two sites already present. With these decisions the list reaches 1,273 sites spread across 173 countries. The 48th session was held in Busan, Republic of Korea, from July 20 to 29, 2026, preceded by the opening ceremony on July 19, with 30 nominations examined.

The geography of the new inscriptions is wide-ranging. Mount Olympus in Greece, the Xiongnu burial sites in Mongolia, the Amazonian theatres of Brazil and the ancient Buddhist site of Sarnath, in India, all join the list. Three countries obtain their first inscription ever: Comoros, São Tomé and Príncipe and South Sudan.

Among the European properties are the Normandy landing beaches: the inscription covers Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword, together with Pointe du Hoc, the remains of the German Atlantic Wall and the American cemetery of Colleville-sur-Mer. It is a perimeter that brings together natural sites, military works and places of memory in a single nomination.

Three sites were added to the list and to the list of properties in danger on the same day.

Inscribed and already at risk. The Boma-Badingilo Migratory Landscape in South Sudan, the Mount Amel castles in Lebanon and Sebastia, in the State of Palestine, were inscribed under the emergency procedure and simultaneously added to the List of World Heritage in Danger. The emergency procedure serves precisely this purpose: to recognise the value of a property when the threat is already underway, without waiting for the ordinary nomination timeline. Moving in the opposite direction is the historic centre of Vienna, which the Committee decided to remove from the list of sites in danger.

On the policy front, the session adopted the World Heritage Strategy for Small Island Developing States 2026-2034, backed by a budget of 13 million dollars. It is the least visible chapter of the Committee’s meetings: it does not concern individual monuments, but the capacity of small island states to nominate and protect their properties.

The documentation on which this account is based is extensive: the two UNESCO press releases, one presenting the session and one on the new inscriptions, and the summaries of the decisions published by Time Out, Forbes and Outlook Traveller. The figures — 25 inscriptions, 1,273 sites, 173 countries, 30 nominations examined — come from the primary source.

What we don’t know. We do not have the complete list of the 25 new properties nor that of the two extended sites: the available materials cite only part of them. We do not know the analytical reasoning behind the individual decisions, contained in the session documents. We do not know which interventions led to Vienna’s removal from the list of sites in danger, nor what safeguarding measures were requested for the three properties inscribed under the emergency procedure. On the 13 million dollars for the strategy, the available materials do not indicate the annual breakdown or the source of the funding.

For those following the heritage calendar, the operational figure is the financial one: 13 million dollars to support a strategy for small island states covering the 2026-2034 period. In the same session two archipelagos, Comoros and São Tomé and Príncipe, obtained their first inscription on the list.

Sources: UNESCO – new inscriptions; UNESCO – session presentation; Time Out; Forbes; Outlook Traveller.