World Heritage Site
World Heritage Sites are more advantageous than disadvantageous
I claim that World Heritage Sites have more disadvantages than advantages for the following reasons–environmental problems and irresponsible UNESCO.
First, since World Heritage Sites attract a lot of foreign travelers, sometimes these sites are often damaged.
With increasing number of visitors, areas surrounding the sites will have trouble caused by those who do not care and do not know much about environment.
For instance, Shirakami mountain district in Japan has suffering from spreading of exotic plants.
These plants were brought by tourists, in the form of seeds.
The local government does not know much about these plants and have no plan and budget to deal with these problems.
Second, UNESCO does not have much knowledge about the background of the site.
A beautiful valley in German was registered as a cultural heritage site.
As the number of visitors increased rapidly, the local government had a plan to build a bridge across the river to solve expected traffic jams.
However, UNESCO did not like the idea and suggested that the local referendum to think twice before construct a bridge.
It said, they should dig a tunnel instead.
Discussing with geologists, environmentalists, and constructors, the local government finally decided to build the designated bridge.
Then, the World Heritage Committee deleted the valley from the list.
For the reasons mentioned above, I believe that a World Heritage Site is not always advantageous for the nation.
(241words)
ある参加者の方のエッセイを参考に、加筆させていただいたものです。
