UNESCO and Conservationists divided over tourism development
impacts at Victoria Falls World Heritage Site
15th May 2026
Despite positive media headlines and tourism industry promotional
gloss all is not well at the Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls UNESCO World Heritage
Site, jointly managed by Zambia
and Zimbabwe
and a global tourism drawcard.
Last week UNESCO General Conference President, Mr
Khondker Talha, visited the Falls, with media reports quoting a glowing
endorsement of the Site's management. Meanwhile a new report from
conservationist campaign group Keep Victoria Falls Wild highlights increasing
concerns, calling for the removal of recent illegitimate tourism developments within
'no development' zones and a moratorium on all new development until a new
Joint Management Plan for the Site is finalised and agreed by all parties,
including UNESCO.
On the 3rd May, World Press Freedom Day, Mr Talha was in Lusaka, launching a
UNESCO joint statement on press freedom calling on Member States to protect
journalists and ensure an enabling environment for a free and independent
media.
The next day, Mr Talha visited the Victoria Falls, touring
both the Zimbabwean and Zambian sides of the transboundary UNESCO World
Heritage Site and commending both countries 'for their strong collaboration
in preserving the Site's Outstanding Universal Value,' and apparently
describing their joint management of the Site as a model of effective joint
stewardship. Less significance was given, however, to his call for
strengthened efforts between the two countries in safeguarding the heritage
site, an admission perhaps that all is not well (Victoria Falls Bits and Blogs, 5th May 2026).
Although publicly unannounced, the visit was apparently in
an official capacity, with a media release from the National Heritage Conservation
Commission stating the visit was undertaken 'to appreciate and assess
the continued efforts by the governments of Zambia and Zimbabwe in safeguarding
the Site’s Outstanding Universal Value, in line with the operational
guidelines of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention' (Victoria Falls Bits and Blogs, 4th May 2026).
There was no selfie at the Falls posted on the President's official
'X' account, no official statement from UNESCO and no coverage of his visit in
the Zimbabwean media the next day (coincidentally African World Heritage Day).
Supported by a media release from the National Heritage Conservation Commission,
the Zambian national press, however, promoted the visit as an endorsement of
their management of the World Heritage Site.
"National Heritage Conservation Commission conservation
officer John Zulu noted that such visits reaffirm the strength of bilateral
cooperation and provide an important platform to showcase the ongoing
efforts towards sustainable conservation and heritage management. He
emphasised the significance of the visit, stating that such high-level
engagements validate ongoing conservation initiatives while enhancing
international recognition and support for heritage preservation
efforts in the region. 'The visit further highlights the global importance
of the Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls as a shared natural asset requiring continued
joint stewardship,' he said.” (Victoria Falls
Bits and Blogs, 5th May 2026)
Mr Talha at the Zambian side of the Falls (Source: NHCC Facebook page)
Conservation Concerns
But behind the media statements and tourism gloss, all is
not well at the Victoria Falls World Heritage Site, and not only are the joint
State Parties of Zambia and Zimbabwe both in the spotlight, but also UNESCO's
oversight - or lack of - of the Site is being increasingly questioned by
conservationists.
In the week prior his visit, local conservation campaign
group, Keep Victoria Falls Wild, released yet another report highlighting an
increasing list of issues and concerns relating to the management of the Site
and calling for a moratorium on all new developments within the Site and its
surrounding Buffer Zone pending finalisation, and approval by UNESCO, of a new
Joint Management Plan for the Site and repeating calls for the removal of
recent controversial tourism developments within the Site's protected area
(Keep Victoria Falls Wild, April 2026).
The report follows recent submission of a new Draft Joint
Plan for the management of the Site, submitted by the State Parties of Zambia
and Zimbabwe who share the management of the transboundary World Heritage Site.
The Plan is heavily criticised for its delayed submission, contradictions,
errors and missing details on key areas such as the management zonation for the
Site and details of permitted/prohibited developments. The lack of detail on
the zones comes after specific requests from the World Heritage Committee for
the boundaries, zonation and buffer zone to be reviewed and clarified in the
new document.
Conservationists also raise significant concerns over recent
tourism developments on the southern, Zimbabwean, side of the Falls and within
the World Heritage Site 'no new development zone' (HESZ) and in particular the
lack of disclosure of these developments, as required under the Convention, to
UNESCO. This continued lack of disclosure follows repeated requests from the
World Heritage Committee for specific information relating to recent developments
within the Site.
The report also identifies a growing list of wider issues
and concerns in relation to the management of the Site before calling on the
World Heritage Committee to reject the Draft Joint Management Plan submitted by
the State Parties and request a final complete and consistent document as soon
as possible, significantly calling for a moratorium on all tourism developments
within the World Heritage Site and surrounding 500m Buffer Zone pending final
submission, and approval by the Committee, of the revised Joint Plan and
satisfactory resolution of a series of controversial tourism developments
within and surrounding the Site.
In addition the report repeats calls for the cancellation of
permits for recent illegitimate tourism developments issued by the Zimbabwe
National Park Authority within the WHS HESZ and for all trace of these
developments to be removed from the Site.
The report comes in the build up to the forthcoming 48th
session of the World Heritage Committee, to be held in Busan, Republic of Korea
over 19-29 July 2026, with conservationists urging the World Heritage Committee
to consider the Site for immediate addition to the List of World Heritage Sites
in Danger if the State Parties fail to adequately address these issues.
Within the context of these issues and concerns, Mr Tahla's
supposed words of endorsement appear to be either a diplomatic smokescreen or a
reflection of institutional, and intentional, blindness. Time will tell -
although there have already been several Committee sessions in recent years and
no action taken on illegitimate tourism developments within the Site.
UNESCO and the Curse of Overtourism
It appears that UNESCO has long had a blind spot for the impacts of tourism
development, and overtourism, to World Heritage Sites, with a growing list of
examples of overtourism following UNESCO listing, leading to questions over the
benefits, or disadvantages, of the listing.
"A listing carries a great deal of prestige, and
benefits include 'increased tourist visitation, increases in employment
opportunities and income for local communities, and better management and
protection of the place,' according to the government of Australia, which has
20 World Heritage Sites." (Victoria
Falls Bits and Blogs, 28th July 2021)
In 2021 Victoria Falls was identified in National Geographic
as a positive example of UNESCO World Heritage Listing with the 'cancellation'
of a dam proposal above the Falls (despite the fact that the dam is proposed
downstream of the Victoria Falls and is in fact back on the cards).
"The World Heritage program has scored high-profile
preservation successes. It exerted pressure to halt a highway near Egypt’s Giza
Pyramids, block a salt mine at a gray whale nursery in Mexico, and cancel a dam
proposal above Africa’s Victoria Falls. Its funds, provided by dues from the
treaty's signers, have hired park rangers, bought parkland, built visitor
centers, and restored temples. It relies on persuasive powers more than legal
threats, but over a period of nearly five decades, the World Heritage
initiative has quietly become a force for appreciating and safeguarding the
world’s special places." (National
Geographic, 5th August 2021)
The drawback of over-tourism has also been well documented.
In addition to the well-known examples of Venice in Italy and Machu Picchu in
Peru, can be added George Town on Penang island, Laos’ Luang Prabang, Casco
Viejo neighbourhood in Panama City, Nærfjord, Norway, Lamu Old Town, Stone Town
of Zanzibar and many more. The increasing examples of World Heritage Sites
impacted by overtourism have led to the development of a new word to describe
the effect - 'unescocide' - coined by Italian writer Marco d'Eramo in 2014.
"The effects of Unesco's designations are a debated
topic. A site being added to the list can be a 'kiss of death' and 'all too
often cures the disease by killing the patient,' Italian journalist Marco
D'Eramo wrote in 2014, coining the term 'Unescocide'. Essentially, in
designating a World Heritage site worthy of protection, the destination becomes
a place of unsustainable levels of tourism. This was not accounted for in the
original treaty, as Unesco 'didn't have the scope of international tourism
then,' Mike Robinson, a professor of cultural heritage at Nottingham Trent
University, told The New York Times.
"It's also difficult for people who 'work in cultural
heritage and in tourism to find that right balance between protecting objects
but not destroying the experience,' Leila Amineddoleh, a lawyer specializing in
cultural heritage... There's also an incentive for developing nations to
get destinations added to the World Heritage list to boost tourism. 'The power
of the Unesco brand can skyrocket a lesser-known destination to a different
level,' wrote CNN. Despite the threat of overtourism, a Unesco World Heritage
designation can 'bring much-needed money, support and global recognition to a
deserving destination.'" (Victoria
Falls Bits and Blogs, 6th August 2023)
A former World Heritage Director at UNESCO even described it
as an 'inevitable destiny'.
"'It is an inevitable destiny: the very reasons why a
property is chosen for inscription on the world heritage list are also the
reasons why millions of tourists flock to those sites year after year,' wrote
Francesco Bandarin, the former World Heritage Director at Unesco." (The
Guardian, 30th August 2017)
References
Keep Victoria Falls Wild, April 2026. Serious
Concerns Over Management of Victoria Falls World Heritage Site. 31st April
2026. (pdf download, 1.3 mb)
National Geographic (5th August 2021) Here’s
how World Heritage status helps destinations around the world. National
Geographic.
The Guardian (30th August 2017) 'Unesco-cide':
does world heritage status do cities more harm than good?.
Victoria Falls Bits and Blogs (6th August 2023) The
significance and benefits of being on Unesco's World Heritage list.
Victoria Falls Bits and Blogs (28th July 2021) Are
World Heritage Site listings a blessing or a curse?
Read more on the wave of tourism developments currently threatening the Victoria Falls World Heritage Site on the Keep Victoria Falls Wild website.