UNESCO World Heritage Sites 2021

Building design
UNESCO

on the banks of the Lahn. Photo: W. Bulach

UNESCO met until July 31 to decide on the new World Heritage Sites for 2021, awarding the three spa towns of Baden-Baden, Bad Ems and Bad Kissingen as well as the Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt. But there are also losers. You can find everything about the new World Heritage Sites here.

UNESCO met until July 31 to decide on the new World Heritage Sites for 2021, awarding the three German spa towns of Baden-Baden, Bad Ems and Bad Kissingen as well as the Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt. But there were also losers. For the third time in history, the UN organization has withdrawn the title from a city – namely Liverpool. You can find everything about the UNESCO World Heritage Sites 2021 here.

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee met in 2021 from July 16 to 31. This year, the 44th session was chaired by those responsible in Fuzhou, China. The meeting was broadcast live on the internet. The topics and responsibilities of the committee are firstly the nominations for the World Heritage List, secondly the state of conservation and protection of numerous sites and thirdly the further development of the World Heritage program. More than 40 sites were nominated in 2021. These included, for example, the rainforests and wetlands of the Colchis region in Georgia, as well as the mining landscape of Roșia Montană in Romania and the estate of landscape architect Roberto Burle Marx in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Germany, on the other hand, was involved with these five nominations:

The committee also reviewed the state of conservation of 258 World Heritage sites. 53 of these sites are officially endangered World Heritage sites. Armed conflicts, climate change, natural disasters and construction projects threaten the United Nations World Heritage Sites. The Committee therefore discussed individual measures, programs and international funding projects to support these World Heritage sites.

The World Heritage Committee discussed the situation of the following sites:

In addition, the Committee is addressing the question of whether the Selous Game Reserve (Tanzania) and the maritime trading town of Liverpool should be removed from the World Heritage List.

An overview of the new UNESCO World Heritage Sites

Ancient beech forests and primeval beech forests of the Carpathians and other regions of Europe (Bosnia and Herzegovina, France, Italy, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Switzerland, Serbia, Slovakia, Czech Republic)

Archaeoastronomical complex of Chanquillo (Peru)

Arslan Tepe (Turkey)

As-Salt – a place of tolerance and urban hospitality (Jordan)

Mining landscape Roșia Montană (Romania)

The work of Jože Plečnik in Ljubljana – people-oriented urban design (Slovenia)

Dholavira: A city of Harappan culture (India)

The arcades of Bologna (Italy)

The engineering of Eladio Dieste: Church of Atlántida (Uruguay)

The islands of Amami-Oshima, Tokunoshima, Iriomote and the northern part of the island of Okinawa (Japan)

Franciscan missions in the Sierra Gorda in Querétaro (Mexico)

Getbol, the Korean tidal flats (Republic of Korea)

Frontiers of the Roman Empire – Lower Germanic Limes (Germany, Netherlands)

Dutch water defense lines (Netherlands)

Ivindo National Park (Gabon)

Cordouan Lighthouse (France)

Mathildenhöhe Darmstadt (Germany)

Nice, winter resort of the Riviera (France)

Padua’s fresco cycles from the 14th century (Italy)

Paseo del Prado and Buen Retiro, Landscape of Arts and Sciences (Spain)

Prehistoric sites of the Jomon in northern Japan (Japan)

SchUM sites Speyer, Worms and Mainz (Germany)

Spa (Belgium), Bad Ems, Baden-Baden and Bad Kissingen (Germany), Vichy (France), Montecatini Terme (Italy), Baden near Vienna (Austria), Karlovy Vary, Františkovy Lázně and Mariánské Lázně (Czech Republic) and Bath (United Kingdom).

Temple of Kakatiya Rudreshwara (Ramappa), Telangana (India)

Trans-Iranian Railway (Iran)

Kaeng Krachan forest complex (Thailand)

Rock carvings on Lake Onega and the White Sea (Russian Federation)

Cultural area of Ḥimā (Saudi Arabia)

Quanzhou: market and trading center of the Song-Yuan dynasty (China)

Colchian rainforests and wetlands (Georgia)

Colonies of Mercy (Belgium, Netherlands)

Slate Landscape of North West Wales (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)

Lower Germanic Limes

Settlements and artificial mummification of the Chinchorro culture in Arica y Parinacota (Chile)

Roberto Burle Marx site (Brazil)

Hawraman/Uramanat cultural landscape (Iran)

Sudanese-style mosques in the northern Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire)

UNESCO World Heritage: Important spa towns in Europe

A total of eleven European cities have now been added to the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2021 with the new title of “Important European Spa Towns”. Their special significance is due to their architectural opulence and choice of materials, which today define the framework of an urban planning type of spa town. Places developed around healing springs that today are witnesses to a once flourishing spa culture. We present these places in this article and also take a look at other towns that have been awarded the title of UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Bad Ems

The Rhineland-Palatinate town on the River Lahn was once considered one of the most famous bathing resorts in Germany. Tsar Alexander II and the later German Emperor Wilhelm I are two of the illustrious guests who exchanged their uniforms for bathing robes here. The insignia of the spa town – Kurhaus, Colonnades, Kursaal, Casino and Kurpark – line the banks of the Lahn like a cast of water, according to the UN organization.

Baden-Baden

Impressive buildings of outstanding importance for spa architecture were erected in the town on the River Oos during the heyday of spa culture. These include the Trinkhalle, designed by Heinrich Hübsch, with its richly decorated lobby. The casino, redesigned in the French neo-baroque style by patron Jacques Bénazet in the 19th century, is also one of them. The Bénazet family’s donations made Baden-Baden “the summer capital of Europe” at the time, according to Lisa Poetschki, Site Manager of the World Heritage Site.

Bad Kissingen

Similar to entering a church, the sublimity of Max Littmann’s Trink- und Wandelhalle slows you down, writes the UN organization. As a result, the building broke a few of the superlatives of the time. After all, it was the largest reinforced concrete building of its kind, the first enclosed drinking hall. It is still the largest drinking hall in Europe today. The central landmark of the town and further evidence of the spa culture of the 20th century is the Regentenbau, the most magnificent building in Bad Kissingen.

Baden near Vienna in Austria, Bath in England, Montecatini in Italy, Vichy in France, Spa in Belgium and the Czech towns of Karlsbad, Franzensbad and Marienbad are also among the eleven important spa towns in Europe listed by UNESCO.

Other artistically and architecturally significant cities in Germany have also been awarded the UNESCO seal:

Darmstadt

An early 20th century ensemble is located on a hill on the edge of Darmstadt’s city center. The buildings erected by artists are described by the director of the Mathildenhöhe Darmstadt Institute as the “cradle of the Bauhaus”. Between 1901 and 1914, the Mathildenhöhe provided internationally influential impulses in architecture and modern art. Here in Darmstadt were the first buildings to break away from the ornate Art Nouveau style. Clear lines and minimalist decoration thus led the way into a new age of architecture.

SchUM cities on the Rhine

Due to their outstanding importance for European Jewry in the Middle Ages, the cities of Speyer, Worms and Mainz – Shpira, Warmaisa and Magenza in Hebrew – have been declared World Heritage Sites by UNESCO. Some of the oldest evidence of Jewish life in Germany can be found here. The history of the synagogues, Talmud schools, women’s schools, ritual baths and cemeteries in the ShUM cities dates back to the 10th century. The design of the buildings shaped the architecture of Jewish buildings in large parts of Europe.

Since the last meeting of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, however, the historic port city of Liverpool can no longer call itself a World Heritage Site. Planned construction projects such as “Liverpool Waters” and the development of the Bramley Moore Dock since the nomination in 2004 would endanger the historic character of the port area too much. In the history of UNESCO World Heritage, the title has only been withdrawn twice before: Oman was removed from the list in 2007 for reducing the size of an antelope sanctuary by 90 percent, and the cultural landscape of Dresden’s Elbe Valley in 2009 due to the construction of the Waldschlösschen Bridge.

Also interesting: Find out why the planned highway tunnel under one of the UK’s most famous sights – the UNESCO World Heritage Site Stonehenge – will not be built here.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Romans in architecture: Antiquity meets modern planning

Building design
people-walking-and-building-akOH2hDr2RE-on-the-burgersteig-in-the-nearby-of-trees

Urban scene with strollers and green avenue in Rome, photographed by Bells Mayer

Romans in architecture: antiquity meets modern planning? It sounds like a museum topic for Latin teachers and amateur historians, but it’s actually very topical – at least for architects who know that a Roman water pipe has more digital relevance than some BIM consultants would like. Roman architecture is not a nostalgia trip, but a lesson in sustainable technology, robust urban planning and visionary choice of materials. Anyone building, planning or developing cities today can learn more from the ancient Romans than from many an innovation agency. But what is really behind the myth of “Roman architecture”? And what does the renaissance of antiquity look like in the age of BIM, AI and sustainability certification?

  • Roman architecture is much more than columns and triumphal arches – it was a blueprint for functional, sustainable and resilient buildings.
  • In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, ancient techniques can be found in a surprising number of modern projects.
  • Digital tools such as BIM and AI make it possible to reanalyze and further develop Roman building principles.
  • Sustainability was not a buzzword for the Romans, but an engineering necessity – and provides valuable impetus today.
  • The examination of Roman architecture demands technical know-how and cultural maturity from today’s planners.
  • The debate surrounding the return of ancient principles is not free of criticism – there is a fierce debate between reconstruction, retro design and genuine innovation.
  • Global architectural trends such as cradle-to-cradle, urban mining and low-tech construction draw on Roman ideas.
  • The future lies in dialog: Antiquity meets algorithm, brick meets digital twin, city wall meets smart city.

Ancient architecture: foundation of modernity or museum relic?

Anyone walking through Cologne, Trier or Vienna today will stumble across Roman walls, amphitheatres and water pipes – often embedded in the modern cityscape, sometimes lovingly museumized, occasionally carelessly built over. But the influence of the Romans on architecture does not end with picturesque ruins. Rather, the civil engineers of antiquity worked with techniques, materials and urban structures that still occupy us today. Roman architecture was radically functional, uncompromising in its use of materials and – it has to be said – surprisingly sustainable. Roman concrete, for example, the famous opus caementicium, still holds up today where some of the exposed concrete of post-war modernism has long since crumbled. This is not folklore, but a tangible technological advantage that modern materials researchers are now trying to decipher using high-tech methods.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the study of Roman architecture is by no means a niche topic. From the reconstruction of entire city quarters in Augusta Raurica to the integration of Roman floor plans in current projects in Trier and experimental research into ancient mortar formulas at ETH Zurich – the dialog between antiquity and the present is alive and well. But it is more than mere imitation. Modern planners draw inspiration from the Romans for clever water management, intelligent traffic routing and durable material concepts. The Romans not only invented the wheel, they also integrated it properly into urban planning. What is sold today as “smart mobility” was part of everyday life in Rome – including car sharing, at least for horse-drawn carriages.

The question is: why is this even interesting? Quite simply because the challenges have remained the same. Scarcity of resources, climate change, urbanization, infrastructural resilience: all of these were already on the minds of the Baumeister of antiquity. Anyone who thinks that digital bells and whistles and green certificates have reinvented the wheel today should take a look at the Roman aqueducts. These are not only monuments in stone, but also data sources for the sustainable construction of tomorrow. You just have to be able to read them.

Of course, there are also skeptics. For many, Roman architecture is just a retro backdrop or a Disneyland aesthetic. But the truth is that behind the stone façades lies a systems thinking that comes surprisingly close to today’s digitalization. The Romans planned their cities as networks – with nodes, redundancies and feedback loops. Anyone who ignores this is missing the opportunity to learn from 2000 years of architectural history. And not for the next museum, but for the next smart city.

The conclusion of this section: Roman architecture is neither a dusty relic nor a mere source of inspiration for retro trends. It is a foundation, mirror and sometimes also a provocation for contemporary architecture. Anyone who dismisses it as museum folklore has already lost the game. Those who interpret it wisely can fundamentally shape the future of architecture.

Innovation through tradition: digital tools meet ancient principles

It sounds paradoxical: digitalization, of all things, has sharpened our view of Roman architecture. While in previous decades, ancient architecture was primarily deciphered by archaeologists, today it is BIM models, simulations and AI-supported analyses that make ancient structures, material structures and construction principles visible. Modern laser scans reveal how the Romans layered walls or constructed vaults. Digital twins of ancient buildings make it possible to simulate load scenarios, understand material fatigue or calculate the effect of earthquakes on the Pantheon. This is not an end in itself, but provides concrete impetus for modern building and infrastructure construction.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, cooperation between construction research, digitization experts and architecture firms is increasing. ETH Zurich, for example, is digitizing Roman buildings in order to derive new construction methods for sustainable bridges or domed structures. In Trier, digital models of Roman temples are being used to develop structural optimizations for current church buildings. And planners in Vienna are using simulation tools to test ancient city districts for their urbanity today. The interface between antiquity and algorithms has long been part of everyday business for innovative planners.

Of course, technology is not an end in itself. The decisive factor is how digital tools translate the findings of antiquity into practice. Anyone who only uses BIM models to render Roman columns is missing the point. It’s about understanding material cycles, extending life cycles and developing resource-saving constructions. The Romans were masters of upcycling – without any certificates. Their example shows: Digitalization makes sense when it combines tradition and innovation instead of playing them off against each other.

At the same time, the discourse is not free of criticism. The danger of trivialization is real: antiquity as a pure rendering gimmick, as “render porn” for Instagram and architecture faculties, doesn’t help anyone. It requires technical depth, a willingness to research and a willingness to engage with the original. Those who manage this can actually create innovation through tradition – and redefine building culture digitally.

The bottom line is that the combination of digital tools and ancient principles is not fashionable hype, but a necessary strategy for sustainable architecture. Anyone who ignores the potential of the Romans in the digital age is building past reality – in the truest sense of the word.

Sustainability: Roman architecture as a model and a challenge

Roman architecture was never an end in itself. It served one goal: to build cities that function, last and use resources efficiently. Sustainability was not a marketing slogan, but a question of survival. The Romans used locally available materials, planned buildings on a modular basis and focused on durability. Their mortar was not only robust, but also self-healing, and their water pipes could withstand thousands of years. Anyone talking about the circular economy, urban mining or low-tech construction today is not inventing anything new – they are building on Roman principles.

The challenges of the present are similar, and the solutions are often surprisingly Roman. In Switzerland, ancient quarrying methods are being rediscovered in order to build more sustainably. In Germany, Roman mortar recipes are being tested for restoration and new construction. In Austria, the layouts of Roman cities serve as a model for smart neighborhood developments that make optimal use of wind, water and sun. The highlight: Roman sustainability is always systemic – never as an individual measure, but as an integral part of urban planning.

Of course, this revival also has its limits. Ancient techniques cannot be transferred one-to-one. The Roman brick is no substitute for the passive house standard, and an aqueduct does not solve every urban infrastructure problem. But the principles are universal: durability, reparability, flexibility, contextual relevance. If you take this seriously, you can bring real sustainability into the 21st century with Roman ideas. But only if they take them further – with the latest technologies, digital planning and new materials.

There is also plenty of criticism. Some see the return to antiquity as an escape from technical innovation – a retreat into the historical because the present seems too complex. But the opposite is the case: anyone who takes Roman sustainability seriously today is facing up to the hardships of reality. After all, sustainable building does not mean doing without, but cleverly integrating old and new. This is exactly what antiquity teaches us – and this is exactly what we need in view of the climate crisis and lack of resources.

Conclusion: sustainability is not the exclusive domain of modernity. The Romans showed us how to achieve great things with limited resources. Those who understand the principle and combine it with digital know-how can create architecture that is truly sustainable – and not just for the certificate.

Job profiles and controversies: what remains of the Roman legacy?

The return of ancient principles to contemporary architecture is more than just an aesthetic trend. It is changing job profiles, demanding new technical knowledge and provoking debates about the core of building. Anyone working as an architect, civil engineer or urban planner today must not only know Roman architecture, but understand it. Material science, historical analysis, digital modeling and sustainable planning are merging into a new professional profile. The demands are increasing, the projects are becoming more complex – and looking back is becoming a driver of innovation.

But the debate is controversial. Some architects see the renaissance of ancient principles as a threat to their own creativity. They fear the banalization of building culture, the slide into pseudo-reconstruction and retro kitsch. Others celebrate antiquity as a universal reference, as an inexhaustible source of inspiration for sustainable and functional architecture. As is so often the case, the truth lies somewhere in between. It takes technical know-how, critical thinking and a willingness to combine the old and the new.

Another contentious issue: who decides how much antiquity is allowed in modern construction? The preservation authorities? The investor? The politicians? The answers differ in Germany, Austria and Switzerland – and the dispute over reconstruction, contemporary interpretation and cultural identity is far from over. But one thing is clear: the debate about Roman architecture is forcing the industry to ask itself fundamental questions. What is authentic? What makes sense? What is sustainable?

Roman heritage also plays a role in the global discourse. International architecture competitions, research projects and sustainable building initiatives draw on ancient principles – from China to California. The Romans have long been part of the global architectural debate, whether as a role model, a warning or a provocation. Anyone planning internationally today cannot ignore them.

To summarize: Roman architecture is not only part of our cultural heritage, but also an active driver of innovation, criticism and further development. It changes the industry, demands new skills and remains a touchstone for the quality of contemporary architecture.

Outlook: Antiquity and the future – dialog instead of dogma

Antiquity is not a dogma, but a dialog partner for the architecture of the future. Anyone building today cannot rest on the laurels of tradition or retro aesthetics. It is about understanding Roman principles, interpreting them digitally and developing them sustainably. The combination of ancient architecture and modern planning is not a contradiction – it is a necessity. Material research, digitalization, sustainability and cultural identity are merging to create a new understanding of architecture that combines the strengths of the past with the opportunities of the present.

The challenges are considerable. Climate change, scarcity of resources, urbanization, technical complexity – all of these call for new answers. The Romans do not provide ready-made solutions, but they do demonstrate principles that are relevant again today: Systemic thinking, robust constructions, flexible urban planning and sustainable materials. Those who supplement this with digital tools create architecture that lasts – not only aesthetically, but also functionally and ecologically.

Of course, the debate remains open. Anything is possible between reconstruction and innovation, between retro kitsch and radical reinterpretation. What is crucial is that the industry has the courage to engage in a dialog with antiquity – critically, technically sound and open to new ideas. Those who manage to do this can not only learn from history, but also continue it.

Germany, Austria and Switzerland are on the right track, even if there is still a lot of skepticism and uncertainty. Cooperation between research, practice and the digital economy offers opportunities to make productive use of the Roman legacy. The global architecture world is looking closely – and expects impulses, not quotes.

The bottom line is that the future of architecture is hybrid. Antiquity meets algorithms, knowledge meets tools, history meets innovation. Those who understand this not only build houses, but also write history – without sandals.

Conclusion: The Romans were the first real “Baumeisters”. Their legacy is not museum ballast, but a treasure trove of sustainable, digital and functional architecture. Anyone building today should listen to them – and contradict them where necessary. This is the only way to create architecture that not only endures, but also creates the future.

Under the sign of the circle

Building design

Hand shower T60

Aarhus Arkitektern developed the T60 shower head for Vola.

The design of the new “T60” hand shower by Aarhus Arkitekterne for Vola is based on clear geometries: The shower head consists of a round disk held by a cylindrical rod that serves as a handle. Rubber rings on the rod ensure a good grip and their arrangement corresponds to the eight jet-shaped rows of nozzles of the shower head.