Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona
Country
Switzerland
Inscribed in
2008
Criterion
(viii)
The conservation outlook for this site has been assessed as "good" in the latest assessment cycle. Explore the Conservation Outlook Assessment for the site below. You have the option to access the summary, or the detailed assessment.
TheSwiss Tectonic Arena Sardona in the north-eastern part of the country covers a mountainous area of 32,850 ha which features seven peaks that rise above 3,000 m. The area displays an exceptional example of mountain building through continental collision and features.excellent geological sections through tectonic thrust, i.e. the process whereby older, deeper rocks are carried onto younger, shallower rocks. The site is distinguished by the clear three-dimensional exposure of the structures and processes that characterize this phenomenon and has been a key site for the geological sciences since the 18thcentury. The Glarus Alps are glaciated mountains rising dramatically above narrow river valleys and are the site of the largest post-glacial landslide in the Central Alpine region. © UNESCO
Summary
2025 Conservation Outlook
Finalised on
11 Oct 2025
Good
Current state and trend of VALUES
Good
Overall THREATS
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Full assessment
Description of values
Exceptional example of mountain building tectonics
Criterion
(viii)
The site can be differentiated from other similar sites by the combination of the clear exposure of the phenomenon in a mountain setting, the access to rock samples deformed at various depths in the Earth’s crust, its history of study, and its ongoing contribution to geological sciences (World Heritage Committee, 2008).
Geological values: the tectonic arena is an exceptional example of mountain building tectonics, specifically the creation of local relief (mountains and valleys). The clear exposure of the Glarus Overthrust is a key feature. The exposures of the rocks below and above this feature are visible in three dimensions and, taken together, have made substantial contributions to the understanding mechanisms of mountain building, which includes ongoing process of rivers carving gorges and valleys, glaciers polishing the land surface, gully erosion and the formation of talus slopes from freeze-thaw weathering (IG TAS, 2021).
Educational values: the diverse geological and geomorphological characteristics of the mountain formation are visible for the layperson and many are easily accessible (IG TAS, 2021).
Scientific values: Due to the easily recognisable features of the rock formations and the relatively easy access, the site has been studied by scientists for over 200 years. The World Natural Heritage Site is exemplary for scientific paradigm shifts and thus for the changeability for the constantly changing knowledge and the underlying figures of thought (IG TAS, 2021).
Geological values: the tectonic arena is an exceptional example of mountain building tectonics, specifically the creation of local relief (mountains and valleys). The clear exposure of the Glarus Overthrust is a key feature. The exposures of the rocks below and above this feature are visible in three dimensions and, taken together, have made substantial contributions to the understanding mechanisms of mountain building, which includes ongoing process of rivers carving gorges and valleys, glaciers polishing the land surface, gully erosion and the formation of talus slopes from freeze-thaw weathering (IG TAS, 2021).
Educational values: the diverse geological and geomorphological characteristics of the mountain formation are visible for the layperson and many are easily accessible (IG TAS, 2021).
Scientific values: Due to the easily recognisable features of the rock formations and the relatively easy access, the site has been studied by scientists for over 200 years. The World Natural Heritage Site is exemplary for scientific paradigm shifts and thus for the changeability for the constantly changing knowledge and the underlying figures of thought (IG TAS, 2021).
Forest, subalpine and alpine ecosystems with their associated flora and fauna
The site, which ranges from 570 to 3,257 m a.s.l. and occupies an area of 32,850 ha, comprises a wide range of subalpine and alpine ecosystems: Beech Fagus sylvatica and Beech-Silver Fir Abies alba forests up to 1,400 m, Silver Fir and Norway Spruce Picea abies forests with Swiss Mountain Pine Pinus mugo and Rhododendron spp. between 1,400 and 1,500-1,800 m, and stands of Arolla Pine Pinus cembra and thickets of Green Alder Alnus viridis around the treeline at about 2,000 m. Above the treeline, there are meadows of Rusty Sedge Carex ferruginea, mat-grass pastures of Nardus stricta, and blue moorgrass evergreen sedge swards of Sesleria caerunata and Carex sempervirens with a rich accompanying flora. There are also alpine mires, raised bogs, seepage communities, and alluvial riparian zones with rare plant communities. Among them is Plaun Segnas Sut at 2,100 m altitude, once of Switzerlands largest mire landscapes. There are also extensive rock and scree areas, as well as 16 small diminishing glaciers, 20 alpine lakes and seven peaks above 3,000 m a.s.l. The flora of the site includes about 800 vascular plant species, 50 of which are nationally protected. The fauna includes many typical alpine mammal species, 80-90 species of breeding birds, 5 fish species, 2 amphibian and 6 reptile species, and a diverse invertebrate fauna, including 90 butterfly species (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; IG TAS, 2021).
Aesthetic
The varied and distinctive relief forms in combination with the various geotopes have a high aesthetic value through the diversity of shapes, colours, interplay of rock, fauna and flora (IG TAS, 2021).
Evidence of cultural landscape evolution
The site demonstrates a cultural landscape characterised by alpine farming. There are hillside terraces of structurally rich agricultural landscapes and valley areas of predominantly open agricultural landscapes. Various evidence of past and recent settlement history e.g. influences on the landscape by the Walser people (Calfeisen) have been researched and documented in museums (IG TAS, 2021).
Sociocultural
The site is of significant value for the local community and is a key component of the social identity and cohesion. It is a source of popular and artistic dialogue, reflected in oral history, literature and music (sagas, legends, songs) and in current and past mountain paintings (IG TAS, 2021).
Assessment information
The robustness of the geological values of the site, the effective management regime and the localized nature of current threats combine to minimize the impacts from threats to its integrity. Even though the geological values of the site remain intact, some overarching threats are accelerating, including climate change. The diminishing of glaciers has continued and has recently led to the loss of the Pizol-Glacier within the site.
Changes in traditional ways of life and knowledge systems that result in negative impact
(Changes in traditional ways of life)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Pastoralism and other types of traditional use of the ecosystems of the site is in decline, with steeper and less valuable areas increasingly released from grazing and the corresponding meadow ecosystems being taken over by scrublands (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). The exact extent and net impact of this trend on the biodiversity values of the site require further study. The current management plan does not refer to the abandonment of traditional use areas but rather focusses on preventing overuse (IG TAS, 2021).
Other Human Disturbances
(Hammering of exposures and extensive sampling)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
In general, the geological values of the site are very robust against anthropogenic interference. Hammering for geological samples by hobby geologists at accessible outcrops like Lochsite needs to be controlled, which is reportedly being done in an effective manner (IUCN, 2008). Any activities involving material removal must be registered and extensively monitored by the management authority of the site. Solid and loose rock quarrying has a long history in the site area, specifically for the development of access roads or the redistribution because of building. Quarrying is only possible with a special permit. Depending on the location, the possible impacts on the World Heritage site need to be considered as these activities can affect the natural dynamic and slope erosion of the site or lead to changes in surface shapes (IG TAS, 2021).
Recreational Activities
(Disturbance and littering by visitors)
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Almost all tourism infrastructure in the area is outside the actual site, and mass tourism is precluded by the inaccessibility of the terrain. Visitor numbers to the higher parts of the site are therefore relatively low, and disturbance and littering only poses a very low threat to the biodiversity values of the area (IUCN, 2008). Inside the site there are several cabin mountain hotels and mountain huts and the aerial cablecar Tschinglen-Alp, which has been an important transportation route since 1964. Although no negative impacts on the OUV are evident, these structures have an impact on the aesthetic value of the site inhibiting views on the geological features (IG TAS, 2021).
In 2025 a new cable car was built (replacing two older ones). It reaches almost a spectacular view point on the top of a mountain (Cassonsgrat). From the top station tourist streams must be controlled in order to preserve the alluvial plain Plaun Segnas Sura. Most of the visitors are expected to enjoy the view from the top station and then take the cable car back to the bottom. There is a certain danger of over tourism which the site managers recognise and counter with measures like creating pathways for hikers.
An additional cable car used for transporting milk from the mountain of Flimserstein down to the valley to make cheese is being reformed and will be open for a small number of tourists in the summer months. These tourists are hikers (no bikes allowed) and are a small number. The possibility of using this small cable car is a welcome gain. There is no danger of over tourism created by this cable car (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
In 2025 a new cable car was built (replacing two older ones). It reaches almost a spectacular view point on the top of a mountain (Cassonsgrat). From the top station tourist streams must be controlled in order to preserve the alluvial plain Plaun Segnas Sura. Most of the visitors are expected to enjoy the view from the top station and then take the cable car back to the bottom. There is a certain danger of over tourism which the site managers recognise and counter with measures like creating pathways for hikers.
An additional cable car used for transporting milk from the mountain of Flimserstein down to the valley to make cheese is being reformed and will be open for a small number of tourists in the summer months. These tourists are hikers (no bikes allowed) and are a small number. The possibility of using this small cable car is a welcome gain. There is no danger of over tourism created by this cable car (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Terrestrial Animal Farming, Ranching & Herding
(Localized overgrazing )
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Cattle grazing on alpine meadows has led to trampling and slope terracing, localized removal/degradation of the vegetation cover and increased frequency of landslides due to erosion (IUCN, 2008). Additionally, agriculture and forestry activities may influence biodiversity and landscape values by affecting the water balance and causing soil pollution due to overfertilization, use of herbicides, and trampling (IG TAS, 2021). These activities are very localized, and some of the activities are in fact necessary to maintain important values of the site. Although the local nature of the threat makes it easier to address through management measures, the trampling issue represents a significant threat. The current management plan recommends developing a pasture management plan adapted to the area, however this requires extensive coordination between different actors.
Changes in Temperature Regimes
(Temperature extremes)
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
The average yearly temperature in Switzerland has risen by 2 degrees C since the second half of the 19th century (BAFU et al., 2020). This has already increased glacier melting, permafrost decline, slope instability and changes in the growing season. Additionally, the changes have led to local extinctions of species specialised in alpine regions and the spread of invasive alien species (IG TAS, 2021). The 16 small glaciers within the site have been diminishing rapidly in the recent past (UNEP-WCMC, 2011), and rapid shifts in ecosystem structure and functioning in spite of only moderate changes in air temperature have been observed in nearly comparable ecosystems (e.g. Cannone et al., 2008). The diminishing of glaciers has continued between 2017 and 2020 and has led to the Pizol-Glacier being declared lost. The glacier is no longer officially monitored (IUCN Consultation, 2020; Häusler, 2019). The exact extent and impact of climate change on the biodiversity values of the site, as well as its interaction with other factors, requires further research.
Rock fall is increasing significantly and small rock avalanches have destroyed existing hiking paths and climbing routes (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Rock fall is increasing significantly and small rock avalanches have destroyed existing hiking paths and climbing routes (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Hunting, Collecting & Controlling Terrestrial Animals, Logging, Harvesting & Controlling Trees
(Hunting and logging)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Traditional hunting is well established and controlled in the area (license requirement), and only poses a very low threat to its biodiversity values (IUCN, 2008). The same is true for logging which is carried out in small areas only (State Party of Switzerland, 2006). With the exception of the two federal hunting ban areas Graue Hörner (SG) and Schilt (GL), where hunting is completely prohibited, traditional hunting is permitted in the site boundaries. Game populations are regulated on the basis of wildlife biology principles. Two further wildlife conservation areas are located in the area of influence: Kärpf (no. 12.00), the oldest wildlife sanctuary in Europe, and Rauti-Tros (No. 14.00). (IG TAS, 2021).
Roads, Trails & Railroads
(Roads and footpaths)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Agricultural access roads and footpaths are present throughout the site with a range of standards and usage frequencies. Their development and use can lead to surface sealing, erosion and fragmentation of the landscape. On some popular footpaths a seasonal overuse has been noted (e.g. in the areas Murgseen, Pizols) leading to erosion damage. The new development or overuse of paths can affect the biodiversity and landscape values of the site. Furthermore, the increased popularity of mountain biking has led to an increased pressure on existing path infrastructure and caused conflicts between bikers, hikers and wild animals. However, according to the management plan the path infrastructure does not endanger the heritage values but rather makes these accessible. Furthermore, efforts are in place to raise awareness of the site’s importance and to ensure extensive stakeholder consultations occur prior to new paths being developed. (IG TAS, 2021)
Potential threats to the site’s values are minimal, however there is increased interest from the federal level to erect wind farms in the vicinity of the site and climate change may exacerbate the likelihood of landslides. Both these potential threats can impact the site's flora and fauna, although the extent of impact remains unclear, especially as wind farm developments would not within the site boundary. Nevertheless, other values, especially the aesthetic could be impacted significantly and the lack of involvement of local municipalities in broader decision-making processes is of concern. In theory, the biodiversity values of the site could also be threatened by large scale tourism infrastructure development, such as mountain skiing installations. However, the overall framework for nature and biodiversity conservation in Switzerland is considered sufficiently robust to preclude such developments.
Recreation & Tourism Areas
(Large scale tourism development)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
In theory, the biodiversity values of the site could be threatened by large scale tourism infrastructure development, such as mountain skiing installations. However, the overall framework for nature and biodiversity conservation in Switzerland is considered sufficiently robust to preclude such developments (IUCN, 2008), and this threat is therefore considered minimal.
Renewable Energy
(Potential renewable energy projects in the future)
Outside site
Promotion of renewable energy projects continues to increase pressure and demand for construction of new wind, solar or hydroelectric power plants. Although the potential for wind energy in the region is relatively low compared to the rest of Switzerland, wind turbines have been built in the region near Vilters and Haldenstein. Further wind energy projects are being investigated and planned in the immediate vicinity of the WH site (IG TAS, 2021). The new St Gallen wind energy plan envisages 92 wind turbines at 17 locations in 39 municipalities with the overall aim to produce 300 GWh of wind power per year by 2050. This is a significant increase from the previous plan of 25 GWh (Kanton St Gallen, 2024). A recent explanatory report of suitable areas for wind farms included multiple locations bordering or in the vicinity of the WH site boundary (in the canton St Gallen, Glarus and Graubünden – Eignungsgebiete 11,12 and 16). The assessment overall concluded a very low potential impact on the OUV of the site, including the cumulative impacts of all potential areas. Potential impacts are expected in the building phase (e.g. through noise) and at the very local level e.g. groundwater. No impact on the visual scenery nor on biodiversity is expected (georegio ag, 2024). However, the Association “Freie Landschaft St. Gallen” has criticised these plans, arguing that the proposed wind farm developments would significantly impact the landscape, its tourist potential and have negative impacts on local flora and fauna e.g. conflict potential with core area of the Capercaillie and national priority species like the Rock ptarmigan. Furthermore, the association has criticised that due to the cantonal special utilisation plan, the planning procedure for larger wind farms does not allow for input by municipalities (Freie Landschaft St. Gallen, 2023; linth24, 2024). However, as the proposals are for sites outside the World Heritage site boundaries, the potential impact on the OUV and other values is expected to be low.
Geological Events
(Landslides)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
The currently rare occurrence of landslides may be exacerbated by total precipitation rates, precipitation intensity, mountain permafrost thaw rates, glacier retreat and air temperature (Morino et al., 2022). A combination of climate change impacts and human disturbance can enhance the instability of slopes in the site and higher likelihood of landslides, which may affect flora and fauna and the access to the site for tourists.
Involvement of stakeholders and rightsholders, including indigenous peoples and local communities, in decision-making processes
The nomination of the site for World Heritage status was driven by the local communes, together with three Swiss cantons.
The World Heritage Trusteeship attempts to facilitate the range of interests and stakeholders. The relationships with stakeholders are either directly through membership in the Delegates Assembly, the establishment of service agreements or there are no institutional relationships. The dedicated Delegates Assembly Committee ensures effective and continued participation of local people in the management of the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011), however the current management plan states that the participatory processes and shared governance could be improved to encompass the range of stakeholders and their views more effectively. Relevant stakeholder groups include municipality authorities, cantonal authorities, tourist actors, environmental organisations and societies, research institutions and representatives of education system, natural resource users, local people and external visitors (IG TAS, 2021).
The World Heritage Trusteeship attempts to facilitate the range of interests and stakeholders. The relationships with stakeholders are either directly through membership in the Delegates Assembly, the establishment of service agreements or there are no institutional relationships. The dedicated Delegates Assembly Committee ensures effective and continued participation of local people in the management of the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011), however the current management plan states that the participatory processes and shared governance could be improved to encompass the range of stakeholders and their views more effectively. Relevant stakeholder groups include municipality authorities, cantonal authorities, tourist actors, environmental organisations and societies, research institutions and representatives of education system, natural resource users, local people and external visitors (IG TAS, 2021).
Legal framework
The site has adequate legal protection, which consists of a mixture of federal, cantonal and local measures. The key features of the World Heritage site are included or being included into cantonal inventories of geological sites, which affords protection status to them. The ecosystems and biodiversity of the area are protected by ca. 30 national and another 80 cantonal and local PAs (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Protected Planet, 2012). Special provisions are in the areas of spatial planning, nature and landscape conservation of importance. In accordance with the federal three-tier system of Switzerland, the legal basis is highly interlinked and competences are divided between the municipalities, cantons and federal government.
Federal level: At federal level, the Nature and Cultural Heritage Protection Act (SR 451) and the Spatial Planning Act (SR 700) are particularly relevant. The Federal Inventory of landscapes and natural monuments (BLN), the national biotope inventories and the Swiss Landscape Concept Switzerland LKS build the basis for management by cantonal authorities and municipalities.
Cantonal and municipality levels: The goals of the Swiss landscape concept are adapted into a landscape concept at the cantonal level. In all three cantons relevant for the World Heritage site, these concepts are still under development (Kantonen Graubünden und St. Gallen und Glarus). These concepts are important to ensure the spatial safeguarding at the municipal level. When submitting the nomination, the municipalities signed an agreement on the joint protection of the site. This agreement expired 2023 and furthermore, two municipalities (Flums and Ragaz) exited the agreement. All cantons are part of the World Heritage trusteeship in charge of management, which is currently being transferred to a new legal and organisation form to strengthen joint management. 11 out of 13 municipalities are represented. It is important that the other two municipalities are involved in future decision-making processes (IG TAS, 2021). In the past two years the new legal organisation has monitored the the plans of municipalities regarding development plans and had success in including conservation measures pertinent to the heritage site.
Federal level: At federal level, the Nature and Cultural Heritage Protection Act (SR 451) and the Spatial Planning Act (SR 700) are particularly relevant. The Federal Inventory of landscapes and natural monuments (BLN), the national biotope inventories and the Swiss Landscape Concept Switzerland LKS build the basis for management by cantonal authorities and municipalities.
Cantonal and municipality levels: The goals of the Swiss landscape concept are adapted into a landscape concept at the cantonal level. In all three cantons relevant for the World Heritage site, these concepts are still under development (Kantonen Graubünden und St. Gallen und Glarus). These concepts are important to ensure the spatial safeguarding at the municipal level. When submitting the nomination, the municipalities signed an agreement on the joint protection of the site. This agreement expired 2023 and furthermore, two municipalities (Flums and Ragaz) exited the agreement. All cantons are part of the World Heritage trusteeship in charge of management, which is currently being transferred to a new legal and organisation form to strengthen joint management. 11 out of 13 municipalities are represented. It is important that the other two municipalities are involved in future decision-making processes (IG TAS, 2021). In the past two years the new legal organisation has monitored the the plans of municipalities regarding development plans and had success in including conservation measures pertinent to the heritage site.
Governance arrangements
The World Heritage Trusteeship attempts to facilitate the range of interests and stakeholders. Currently, the secretariat, with four employees, functions as a facilitator between the Committee, the local communities, scientific advisory body, federal state, cantons and the Association of World Heritage & Geopark Sardona. The relationships with stakeholders are either directly through membership in the Delegates Assembly, the establishment of service agreements or there are no institutional relationships. The dedicated Delegates Assembly Committee ensures effective and continued participation of local people in the management of the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011), however the current management plan states that the participatory processes and shared governance could be improved to encompass the range of stakeholders and their views more effectively. By developing the Trusteeship into a new organisational and legal entity the collaborative management should improve. This Trusteeship has been implemented successfully in 2024 and is now fully funcional. Furthermore, the action plan highlights the aim to further develop the shared governance of the site and expand the networks and partnerships of the Trusteeship (IG TAS, 2021). This includes the open exchange regarding shared governance goals with all stakeholders, the development of an action plan for the development of relationships with all relevant actors, implementation of pilot projects on alpine agriculture, nature and landscape protection led by the cantons and local nature conservation agencies, signing agreements between relevant actors (IG TAS, 2021).
Integration into local, regional and national planning systems (including sea/landscape connectivity)
The site is well-integrated into regional and national planning systems: Each of the three cantons involved developed a master plan for the integrated management of the area, which was approved by the federal government and is binding to all authorities. A regional management plan was concluded in 2003 and was being implemented at the time of inscription (IUCN, 2008). All three cantons (Glarus, Graubünden, St. Gallen), in which the World Heritage site is located, are currently developing landscape and, in some cases, biodiversity conservation concepts, which will require coordination in these areas for the management of the site (IUCN Consultation, 2020). However, the process is time consuming and progress has been slow. As of 2025 all three cantons have adopted management plans.
Boundaries
The boundaries of the site were considered adequate at the time of inscription. It is well supported by stakeholders and follows geographic features, as well as the boundaries of existing protected areas. Although initially due to the topography of the area, there was no need for a buffer zone (IUCN, 2008), both an extension and the creation of a buffer zone is mentioned in the current management plan as being potentially useful. This is because there are areas bordering the WH site with the potential for exceptional values (e.g. Hausstock-Kärpf, Tödi area, Rhine Gorge/Ruinaulta) which could contribute to the overall values of the existing site. Furthermore, establishing a buffer zone could further expand awareness raising activities and involvement of the local community. The discussions between relevant stakeholders is ongoing to determine the feasibility of a boundary modification and/or buffer zone establishment (IG TAS, 2021). This discussion has been intensified in 2024 with a decision to establish this buffer zone step by step.
Overlapping international designations
No overlapping designations currently, although the establishment of a UNESCO Geopark is being discussed and developed by the Association World Heritage and Geopark Sardona (IG TAS, 2021).
Implementation of World Heritage Committee decisions and recommendations
There have been no recommendations to the State Party.
Climate action
Although the management plan does not contain a specific climate action, it does refer to the regular monitoring of the conservation status of the site, including climate change and climate-related impacts. Specific projects are planned to implement the monitoring concept, recognise impacts early on and develop actions to protect the site's values, including expanding the site's perimeter. Furthermore, there is a specific goal to monitor and report on natural events, including the impact of climate change on World Heritage values, through regular exchanges with the scientific community.
Management plan and overall management system
There is a central management plan for the site, which was updated and finalised in 2021 (IG TAS, 2021). This includes an overall vision, strategic goals for 2030 and an action programme which elaborates on specific action points and measures to achieve these. Feedback from discussions with cantons and municipalities was integrated. The cantons are officially responsible for the protection of the site and have commissioned the World Heritage Trusteeship, supported by representatives from the cantons, municipalities, federal state and supplemented by advisory bodies and a funding committee (IG TAS, 2021). In addition, there are coordinated, binding cantonal master plans.
This setup was considered effective upon inscription of the site on the World Heritage list (IUCN, 2008) and remains so to date.
This setup was considered effective upon inscription of the site on the World Heritage list (IUCN, 2008) and remains so to date.
Law enforcement
The relevant federal, cantonal and local legislation is being effectively enforced.
Sustainable finance
The site's funding is provided by a public-private partnership. The yearly budget is around 850,000 CHF (IG TAS, 2021), which covers the estimated required annual budget from the time of nomination (IUCN, 2008). The tasks and goals of the site are periodically defined in so-called program agreements with the federal government, which in turn provides financial aid of a maximum of 50%.The 2020 budget, which is used as the basis in the current management plan was composed of: Swiss Confederation 400,000 CHF, cantons 284,000 CHF, municipalities/local authorities 130,000 CHF, sponsors 50,000 CHF, which totalled 864,000 CHF. There is further potential to increase especially the sponsorship contribution (Ketterer Bonnelame et al., 2019), however at this time the funding looks to be sufficient to cover the operational costs for the site's management.
For 2025 the contributions from the cantons grew to 285'000 such that in total the site receives 911'000 CHF (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
For 2025 the contributions from the cantons grew to 285'000 such that in total the site receives 911'000 CHF (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Staff capacity, training and development
The site itself has a small administration unit (four employees on regular basis) and staff jointly managed by the three Swiss cantons and the municipalities with which it overlaps. Staff tasked with aspects of the site’s management take part in the training and development activities of these institutions, regularly.
The members of the Trusteeship, the Assembly of Delegates and the Scientific Advisory boards provide valuable services pro bono. Ranger and GeoGuides are involved in the daily management of the site. Rangers are partially financed by the Trusteeship. The approx. 80 GeoGuides are freelancers and can include people from the local community.
The need for improving staff capacity and financial resources is highlighted in the management plan. Different approaches are suggested, e.g. utilising internships and strengthening relationships with particular stakeholders such as nature conservation organisation and associations (IG TAS, 2021). However, the current staff capacity seems sufficient to effectively manage the site and protect its values.
The members of the Trusteeship, the Assembly of Delegates and the Scientific Advisory boards provide valuable services pro bono. Ranger and GeoGuides are involved in the daily management of the site. Rangers are partially financed by the Trusteeship. The approx. 80 GeoGuides are freelancers and can include people from the local community.
The need for improving staff capacity and financial resources is highlighted in the management plan. Different approaches are suggested, e.g. utilising internships and strengthening relationships with particular stakeholders such as nature conservation organisation and associations (IG TAS, 2021). However, the current staff capacity seems sufficient to effectively manage the site and protect its values.
Education and interpretation programmes
The site orients it’s approach to education and interpretation programmes according to the 2011 education strategy (IG TAS, 2011) and the 2013 education concept (Meyer, 2013). A number of interpretative materials and installations are available (IG UNESCO World Heritage Tectonic Arena Sardona, 2012). As part of the implementation of the education strategy, a first group of GeoGuides was trained in 2011. There are also visitor centres, thematic tour offers, brochures and flyers (e.g. Imper-Filli, 2010), including a range of educational materials for different age groups available online (https://data.unesco-sardona.ch/lernen/). In 2012 two information centers were opened in the Canton of Glarus. In 2015 one information centre was opened in the Canton of Graubünden, in 2017 one in the canton of St. Gallen. In 2018, the 10 years anniversary was celebrated and associated activities have led to a demonstrable increase in awareness of the World Heritage status of the area. In addition, the first professional teaching aid for primary schools level has been launched (IUCN Consultation, 2020).
The future aim is to extend the educational approach from focussing on the geological phenomenon and processes, to encompass the wide range of other values for which the site is of significance. Local communities are to be more strongly engaged in the development of education and interpretation programmes and there is a plan to hire an educational coordinator (IG TAS, 2021).
The future aim is to extend the educational approach from focussing on the geological phenomenon and processes, to encompass the wide range of other values for which the site is of significance. Local communities are to be more strongly engaged in the development of education and interpretation programmes and there is a plan to hire an educational coordinator (IG TAS, 2021).
Tourism and visitation management
Apart from the 50 sites of interest of the Sardona Geopark, visitor centres and GeoGuides, there are about 12 interpretative tour products on offer through the site’s website. These range from 1 hour to several days in length. The site cooperates with local and cantonal tourism companies and networks, which provide complementary products such as accommodation, transport and gastronomy (IG UNESCO World Heritage Tectonic Arena Sardona, 2012). Three tourist organisations are responsible for tourism within the site. These collaborate with the Trusteeship via a steering committee and a service agreement for the project management “Welterbe Erlebnisse (PLEWE)”. Potentially the steering committee will be formally integrated into the organisation of the Trusteeship as an advisory board (IG TAS, 2021).
Regarding the Tourism Visitation Concept (Gessner & Siegrist, 2013) – there has been difficulty in systematically implementing this concept due to the large number of stakeholders involved with different interests. The concept is broad and lacks a binding nature which makes implantation challenging. A key aim of the current management strategy is to intensify collaboration between different actors and develop a strategy and measures for an optimal coordination of protection and use (IG TAS, 2021).
Regarding the Tourism Visitation Concept (Gessner & Siegrist, 2013) – there has been difficulty in systematically implementing this concept due to the large number of stakeholders involved with different interests. The concept is broad and lacks a binding nature which makes implantation challenging. A key aim of the current management strategy is to intensify collaboration between different actors and develop a strategy and measures for an optimal coordination of protection and use (IG TAS, 2021).
Sustainable use
Biotic and abiotic resources are being used within the site’s boundaries in the context of forestry, livestock grazing, agriculture, hunting, research and energy production. The activities of the different actors, some of which are land owners is well regulated according to the legislation at federal, cantonal and municipal levels. The World Heritage Trusteeship focusses on maintaining the site’s OUV and facilitates the coordination between actors, providing assessments of potential project developments from the perspective of the World Heritage site. In the future, a stronger engagement of all actors is envisioned to further strengthen the collaborative management of the site (IG TAS, 2021).
Monitoring
At the time of inscription, annual monitoring of biological, environmental, glaciological, and socio-economic indicators (e.g. visitation) was planned (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). An effective monitoring system has now been installed and some data have been collected already. Monitoring focusses on the conservation status of the site and the impacts from various factors e.g. climate change, tourism and farming. There is also an action plan which guides monitoring of specific indicators (IG TAS, 2021). The basis is set by the monitoring concept from 2013, which was developed in collaboration with the Institute for Landscape and Open Space (ifs) and the university for technology Rapperswil (Gessner et al., 2013).
Research
The site has provided an immense contribution to the understanding of geology for the last 200 years. It triggered the development of overthrust theory and mountain building. The site continues to give raise to a wide range of scientific publications, particularly on sedimentology, tectonics, quaternary geology and geomorphology. The site is also engaged in the management of the scientific knowledge accumulated from the site, though a central repository of scientific literature and information (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Students from the universities of Bern and Zürich started working in the area in 2012 and will continue in the near future. The site is in close cooperation with researchers dealing with the Flims landslide, the largest landslide within the Alps.
There is a scientific advisory board which unites experts from a range of disciplines including geology, biology, tourism, landscape maintenance, communication etc. The board builds the interface between the World Heritage Trusteeship and research institutions. In 2015 a research concept was developed (Pfiffner & Siegrist, 2015), which specifies the research priorities. The transfer of information between the management, research and educational stakeholders is excellent due to the existing bodies and frameworks (IG TAS, 2021).
There is a scientific advisory board which unites experts from a range of disciplines including geology, biology, tourism, landscape maintenance, communication etc. The board builds the interface between the World Heritage Trusteeship and research institutions. In 2015 a research concept was developed (Pfiffner & Siegrist, 2015), which specifies the research priorities. The transfer of information between the management, research and educational stakeholders is excellent due to the existing bodies and frameworks (IG TAS, 2021).
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats outside the site
Due to its overall inaccessibility and the appropriateness of its boundaries, the site is not subject to significant threats from the outside and the management is sufficient to buffer potentially negative impacts e.g. from visitation.
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats inside the site
No formal management effectiveness assessment has been conducted for the site. Overall, management effectiveness was considered satisfactory at the time of inscription (IUCN, 2008). The current management plan highlights some areas for improvement, including improving collaborative governance with all stakeholders, ensuring staff and financial resources are sufficient, and finalising the landscape concepts at the cantonal level for all involved cantons (IG TAS, 2021).
The protection and management of the Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona is overall highly effective, also due to the set up of the management body in the form of a Trusteeship. There are, however, a number of suggested improvements in the current management plan (e.g. further strengthening collaboration and shared governance arrangements, finalising landscape concepts at the cantonal level, extending the site boundaries, exploring the nomination of a UNESCO Geopark), which will likely contribute to further strengthening the overall governance framework and management system. The site's inaccessibility further helps to protect the World Heritage values and other values.
Good practice examples
1. The site offers an example for an interesting cooperative management system which integrates national, regional and local authorities, as well as the tourism industry via a Trusteeship. This may be applicable to other comparable sites.
2. The education, interpretation and visitor programmes of the site are a good practice example of making a site’s values accessible to the general public, through a varied and well-documented range of activities, products and facilities that is coordinated between the scientific community, tourism companies, local communities (GeoGuides) and site management.
2. The education, interpretation and visitor programmes of the site are a good practice example of making a site’s values accessible to the general public, through a varied and well-documented range of activities, products and facilities that is coordinated between the scientific community, tourism companies, local communities (GeoGuides) and site management.
Exceptional example of mountain building tectonics
Good
Trend
Stable
The site’s geological values are extremely robust in the face of anthropogenic impacts, are rather inaccessible in part and are well-managed (IUCN, 2008). As a result, the site’s geological values are in a good and stable state.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
Stable
The site is an exceptional example of mountain building tectonics, including the Glarus Overthrust, as well as the exposures of the rocks below and above this feature which are visible in three dimensions. Processes forming landscapes are well exposed in the deep valleys within the property. The site’s geological values are in a good state and stable.
Assessment of the current state and trend of other important biodiversity values
Low Concern
Data Deficient
The nationally important biodiversity values of the site are inferred to be intact, although there is concern about impaired conservation state of alpine meadows due to overgrazing by cattle. High Alpine areas are not subject to this concern. However, no monitoring data on specific biodiversity values inside the site are currently available from the site’s website (these are dispersed between local, cantonal and federal agencies), and the trend of these values is therefore considered data deficient.
Assessment of the current state and trend of other important values
Good
Stable
The site is of significant importance to the local community due to its aesthetic and sociocultural values, while also providing evidence of the evolution of the cultural landscape in the region. Currently these values can be considered stable, however, potential threats, especially from wind farm developments and tourism may impact these negatively in the future e.g. by preventing a clear view of the site, littering and physical destruction of the site by visitors.
Additional information
Sacred natural sites or landscapes
The landscapes of the high-mountain parts of site are of considerable wilderness value, which complements other values of the site.
Outdoor recreation and tourism
Nature based tourism is practiced at a high intensity around the site (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).The site offers a unique opportunity to experience not only its outstanding universal valuel, but also the landscapes and culture of the Alps. This contributes significantly to income generation and to the socio-economic development in the site’s vicinity.
Importance for research,
Contribution to education
The site has critically contributed to humankind’s understanding of geology, mountain formation and (indirectly) plate tectonics since the early 19th century, and continues to support extensive scientific research and publications (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). In addition, new know-how on the management of World Heritage and other natural areas is generated and tested by the institutions managing the site.
Contribution to education
Based on the site’s immense importance for geological knowledge generation and its exemplary visitor and educational facilities, it also functions as a living museum, which helps people understand how mountains and the geological environment in general have evolved throughout Earth’s history.
Legal subsistence hunting of wild game,
Collection of wild plants and mushrooms,
Fishing areas and conservation of fish stocks,
Traditional agriculture,
Livestock grazing areas
Parts of the site continue to be seasonally used as pastures and meadows and for agriculture, as well as hunting and fishing grounds, in a traditional way (UNEP-WCMC, 2011; State Party of Switzerland, 2006). The difficult terrain prohibits the use of large machines in agricultural activity. This provides livelihoods and income to a significant number of people (tens to hundreds), and maintains cultural landscapes within the site that have been formed as a result of traditional land use.
Collection of wild plants and mushrooms are regulated by cantonal laws. Strict cantonal regulations also exist for fishing and hunting of wild game.
Collection of wild plants and mushrooms are regulated by cantonal laws. Strict cantonal regulations also exist for fishing and hunting of wild game.
Sustainable extraction of materials (e.g. coral, shells, resin, rubber, grass, rattan, etc)
Various companies process mineral resources from the area of influence, for example natural stone, gravel, stone wool and building materials (IG TAS, 2021).
Water provision (importance for water quantity and quality)
The site provides an important water source which in connected areas is utilised for hydropower, mineral and thermal springs and bottled water (IG TAS, 2021).
The main benefits of the Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona are knowledge generation, education and nature based tourism, but the site also offers significant nature conservation and natural resource use related benefits. There may be unexploited synergies between some of these benefits, such as between traditional natural resource use and nature conservation on the one hand and tourism on the other hand.
| № | Organization | Brief description of Active Projects | Website |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tectonic Arena Sardona | Training for GeoGuides, aimed at supporting education and interpretation activities at the site |
https://unesco-sardona.ch/neuer-lehrgang-geoguide-sardona
|
| 2 | Tectonic Arena Sardona | Establishment of a long-distance thematic hiking trail on the site aimed at conveying information on mountain building, landscape formation and conservation. |
https://unesco-sardona.ch/erlebnis/sardona-welterbe-weg
|
| 3 | PLEWE, GeoGuides | The project was initiated in 2020 by the project lead for World Heritage experiences (PLEWE). The implementation period is 2022-24. The core aim is to enhance the experience of intact nature and the World Heritage values. The project will unite the increasing demand for close to nature experiences and the development of suitable offers in the World Heritage site. |
https://partner.heidiland.com/projekt/spirit-of-sardona-im-unesco-welterbe.html
|
References
| № | References |
|---|---|
| 1 |
BAFU et al. (2020). Klimawandel in der Schweiz. Indikatoren zu Ursachen, Auswirkungen, Mass¬nahmen (Umwelt-Zustand, Bd. 2013). Bundes¬amt für Umwelt.
|
| 2 |
Cannone, N., Diolaiuti, G., Guglielmin, M. and Smiraglia, C. (2008). ‘Accelerating climate change impacts on alpine glacier forefield ecosystems in the European Alps’. Ecological Applications 18(3): 637-648.
|
| 3 |
Freie Landschaft St Gallen (2023). Stellungnahme zu den geplanten Windenergiezonen. Richtplananpassung 2023 Windenergie, Stellungnahme, pp 1-71. [online] Available at: https://0d458177-9e2f-4a1b-aa81-4ee388912220.usrfiles.com/u… [Accessed on 12 Nov 2024].
|
| 4 |
Gessner, S., & Siegrist, D. (2013). Besucher¬managementkonzept Tektonikarena Sardona. Bestandsaufnahme und Leitfaden. Institut für Landschaft und Freiraum. HSR Hochschule für Technik Rapperswil.
|
| 5 |
Gessner, S., Ketterer Bonnelame, L., Siegrist, D. (2013). UNESCO-Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona. Monitoringkonzept und Ersterhebung. Hrsg. IG UNESCO-Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Landschaft und Freiraum. HSR Hochschule für Technik Rapperswil, Nr. 9. Rapperswil. [online] Available at: https://data.unesco-sardona.ch/forschen/monitoring/2014/mon…
|
| 6 |
Häusler, T. (2019). Zu klein für die Vermessung. Abschied vom Pizolgletscher. SRF. [online]. Available at: <https://www.srf.ch/kultur/wissen/zu-klein-fuer-die-vermessu…;. [Accessed 30 November 2020].
|
| 7 |
IG TAS (2021). Managementplan Tektonikarena Sardona 2020-2030. IG UNESCO-Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona CH-7320 Sargans. Pp 1-112 [online] Available at: https://data.unesco-sardona.ch/info/gemeinden/managementpla… [Accessed on 12 Nov 2024].
|
| 8 |
IG TAS. (2011). Bildungsstrategie. Interessens¬gemeinschaft UNESCO-Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona.
|
| 9 |
IG UNESCO World Heritage Tectonic Arena Sardona (2012). Website. Available at: <https://unesco-sardona.ch/en/homepage>;. [Accessed 30 November 2020].
|
| 10 |
IUCN (2008). ‘World Heritage Nomination – IUCN Technical Evaluation: Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona, Switzerland – ID No. 1179’. Gland: IUCN. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 20 June 2012.
|
| 11 |
IUCN Consultation (2020). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation form: Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona, Switzerland.
|
| 12 |
Imper-Filli, D. (2010). ‘New lights on old sites’. Brochure for the UNESCO World Heritage site “Swiss Tectonic Arena” Sardona. Sargans: Secretariat of UNESCO World Heritage site “Swiss Tectonic Arena” Sardona. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 20 July 2012.
|
| 13 |
Kanton St Gallen (2024). Regierung legt 17 Windeignungsgebiete fest. Media article first published 27 September 2024. [online] Available at: https://www.sg.ch/news/sgch_allgemein/2024/09/regierung-set… [Accessed on 12 Nov 2024].
|
| 14 |
Ketterer Bonnelame, L., & Siegrist, D. (2019). Tektonikarena Sardona. Identifizierung von Pro-jektmöglichkeiten zur Förderung des Outstanding Universal Value und von Natur und Landschaft. Institut für Landschaft und Freiraum. Hochschule für Technik Rapperswil.
|
| 15 |
Linth24 (2024). Axpo mit Falschinfos zu Windpark. Media article first published 21 March 2024. [online] Available at: https://linth24.ch/articles/237530-axpo-mit-falschinfos-zu-… [Accessed on 12 Nov 2024].
|
| 16 |
Meyer, J. (2013). UNESCO-Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona Bildungskonzept. Rundumberge.
|
| 17 |
Morino, C., Coratza, P., & Soldati, M. (2022). Landslides, a key landform in the global geological heritage. Frontiers in Earth Science, 10, 864760.
|
| 18 |
Pfiffner, O. A., & Siegrist, D. (2015). Unesco- Welterbe Tektonikarena Sardona Forschungskon¬zept. Interessensgemeinschaft UNESCO-Welter¬be Tektonikarena Sardona.
|
| 19 |
Protected Planet (2012). ‘Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona World Heritage Site’. [online] . Accessed 20 June 2012.
|
| 20 |
Secretariat of Interest Group UNESCO World Heritage Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona (2012). ‘Annual Report 2011’. Sargans, Switzerland: Interest Group UNESCO World Heritage Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona (2012). [Electronic reference] . Accessed 20 July 2012. (in German)
|
| 21 |
State Party of Switzerland (2006). ‘Nomination of the Glarus overthrust as a UNESCO World Heritage site’. Bern: Federal Office for the Environment. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 20 July 2012.
|
| 22 |
UNEP-WCMC (2011). Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona, Switzerland. UNEP-WCMC World Heritage Information Sheets. [Electronic reference] . Accessed 20 July 2012.
|
| 23 |
World Heritage Committee (2008). Decision 32 COM 8B.14. Swiss Tectonic Arena Sardona. In: Report of decisions of the 32nd session of the World Heritage Committee (Quebec City, 2008). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: <http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1179/documents/>; [Accessed 30 November 2020].
|
| 24 |
georegio ag (2024). Ermittlung Eignungsgebiete Windenergie Kanton St.Gallen (gemäss Art. 8b RPG). Erläuterungsbericht. Auftraggeber: Kanton St.Gallen, Amt für Raumentwicklung und Geoinformation (AREG). Pp 1-43 [online] Available at: https://www.sg.ch/content/dam/sgch/bauen/raumentwicklung/ri… [Accessed on 12 Nov 2024].
|