Only three times previously has someone been removed from the World Heritage List, the last time in 2021 when the World Heritage Committee struck down the high-rise building in Liverpool. In Aurland’s case, the pressure comes the other way – from the municipality itself. In Sogn Avis, two Labor party leaders identify the world heritage status of the Nerøyfjorden and the Aurlandsfjorden as the “root” for the local self-government being put out of business. Furthermore, they complain that the world heritage “is being used as a crowbar” for more or less good measures that the municipality just has to come up with. – It is a drastic step to take. But we must be heard, says Kjell Bøe Bjørgum, mayoral candidate for Aurland Ap, to news. Norway currently has eight inscriptions on UNESCO’s list of world cultural heritage. World Heritage in Norway Norway has eight sites on UNESCO’s list of cultural and natural heritage in the world: Bryggen in Bergen (1979) Urnes Stave Church (1979) Røros Bergstad and Circumferensen (1980 and expanded in 2010) Mountain Art in Alta (1985) Vegaøyan (2004) Struve’s meridian arc – four Norwegian points (2005) West Norwegian fjord landscape – Geirangerfjorden and Nerøyfjorden (2005) Rjukan-Notodden industrial heritage (2015) The first four Norwegian World Heritage cities are cultural cities. In 2004, Norway got its first cultural landscape on the list – Vegaøyan. West Norwegian fjord landscape is the first natural area Norway has received on the list. Source: Unesco.no In 2005, the Nærøyfjorden was included in the world heritage list, with Queen Sonja as High Protector. Here together with former Aurland mayor Olav Ellingsen (Sp). 18 years later, Ellingsen, who is now chairman of Aurland Hamnestell, says that the municipality might have been better off if they had not been seen on the world map. Photo: Arne Veum – We should do what we can to no longer have the status The background for the conflict is the so-called Zero Emissions Regulation, which states that cruise ships and ferries must sail emission-free in Norwegian world heritage fjords “by 2026 at the latest”. The regulation was adopted by the Storting in 2018, to protests from several “cruise villages” who tried to extend the deadline to 2030, without success. In a new proposal for a transitional arrangement, Aurland has proposed a softer phasing in of the rules in order to have better time to adjust. In March, Mayor Trygve Skjerdal (Sp) personally went to the ministry to hand over the “less rigid” Environment Package to climate minister Espen Barth Eide (Ap). – The report received many words of praise, but little feedback on whether he will be used as a basis for further work, Skjerdal tells news. In the meantime, the cost-benefit analyzes in Aurland are running high – about the benefits and pitfalls of the world heritage status, and whether it is possible to terminate the agreement. Monica Finden, who is group leader in Aurland Høgre, says it is a “crisis” for the municipality if they have to say goodbye to cruise traffic from 2026. – If the negative consequences are greater than the gain from the world heritage status, then we should do what we can to not have the status longer, she says. Tourism expert Odd Roar Lange says many would “give their right arm” for UNESCO status. – Many would do almost anything to get on the list. Now it looks like some politicians want to do anything to get off the list, and that is almost completely incomprehensible, he says. – The best thing is if the arrangement was scrapped Frode Bekkestad, Høgre – If the world heritage status stands in the way of boat and cruise traffic, we must consider revoking the status if necessary. David Underdal, SP – I believe that a transitional arrangement will facilitate further cruise calls and ensure a sustainable establishment of land traffic, in line with the parliamentary decision. If the point is to improve the climate, the environment and the reputation of the world heritage, then it is clearly the best alternative. Terje Hilstad, Sp – It would be best if both arrangements were scrapped. But of course that won’t happen. The municipality may be able to abolish the world heritage status or abuse it enough to make it disappear, but it is unfortunately unrealistic to revoke the protection. Rita Berstad Maraak, Harbor Manager in Stranda – Stranda harbor management is busy finding the right measures to ensure that we continue to have cruise traffic in Stranda municipality’s sea area – also after 2026. We have presented several good measures for both the Norwegian Maritime Directorate, the ministry and politicians. We are on the same page as many, preoccupied with protection and sustainability, but see that both jobs and housing can be a challenge for a few years, until cruise ships can once again sail into the fjord when the technology for large ships is available. We have seen that the debate around world heritage would come, but we are waiting for the final hearing from the Ministry of Climate and Environment. – The world heritage status is not a subscription that you call to cancel. If we behave in such a way that UNESCO takes away our status, I think it would put us in a particularly bad light, says Trygve Skjerdal (Sp). Photo: Valentina Baisotti / news – We have seen that the debate will come David Underdal is deputy mayor of Aurland municipality and chairman of the Nærøyfjorden Verdsarvpark. He characterizes the debate about dropping the world heritage status as “unconstructive”. – We want to manage the world heritage locally, not put it in jeopardy, he says. He adds that it is “wrong” to attach global climate and environmental policy to world heritage status, and that special rules linked to world heritage must have an effect in the same area. A tortuous drive north, to the equally iconic Geiranger, is a sign that the same debate may be on the way: – We have seen that the debate around world heritage will come, but we are waiting for the final hearing from the Ministry of Climate and Environment, says port manager Rita Berstad Maraak . In March, Mayor Trygve Skjerdal (Sp) personally went to the ministry to hand over the “less rigid” Environment Package to climate minister Espen Barth Eide (Ap). Photo: Ole Berg-Rusten / NTB – It is crazy to use the world heritage status as a scapegoat and chopping block – the world heritage status is not a protection or a decision-making body, says Aurland mayor Skjerdal. He says it is the Storting that must be the addressee for complaints and debtors (“they are the ones who ride fad horses”), and that it is wrong to use the world heritage status as a “scapegoat and scapegoat for politically unwise principled horsemanship”. He adds that the world heritage status has been awarded through a long international process and that the marketing value is “bigger and more important than we realise”. – The world heritage status is not a subscription that you call to cancel. If we behave in such a way that UNESCO takes away our status, it will put both the nation of Norway and the municipality of Aurland in a particularly embarrassing light. – We must protect the world heritage status, then we would rather consider scrapping national politicians. Environmental requirements for the cruise industry Only Spain, Italy, Greece and France have greater emissions from cruise ships than Norway. According to a study by the European organization Transport & Environment (T & E), the emission of health-damaging sulfur dioxide from cruise traffic is five times higher than from all other ship traffic along the Norwegian coast. According to Vestlandsforsking, the disappearance of cruise ships in Vestland last year contributed to 60,000 tonnes less CO₂ being released. This corresponds to the annual emissions from 26,000 cars. In 2018, the Storting decided that cruise ships must be completely emission-free before they are allowed to sail in Norwegian world heritage fjords from 2026. In February 2019, 12 Norwegian cruise municipalities agreed on 14 environmental requirements for the Cruise Owners Act. From 1 March 2019, it has been a requirement in the world heritage fjords that ships must use fuel with a maximum sulfur content of 0.1 per cent. Hurtigruten’s Roald Amundsen was the first cruise ship that could sail all-electric, for 45–60 minutes. Since then, several other cruise ships have received battery packs, but there is still a long way to go before the fleet approaches the emissions target. Three main objectives are met in the new cruise regime: Cruise ships must meet new emission requirements. The cruise calls must be distributed better to avoid overcrowding. Norway must get passengers and shipping companies to add more money. When the pandemic stopped all cruise traffic to Norway, Norway had almost one million cruise tourists annually. They left close to NOK 3 billion. The Stegastein lookout point is in Aurland municipality. A report from Menon, commissioned by the Norwegian Maritime Directorate, found that the zero discharge requirement has little overall effect because the discharge is moved from the world heritage fjords and to other places. Photo: Noralv Distad
ttn-69
Fight in the cruise village if they are to be removed from the world heritage list – news Vestland
