There are 1,121 World Heritage sites in 167 nations as of now. Each year, new sites are discovered, and some are stripped off the list as rejected world heritage sites, just like Liverpool lost status. World Heritage sites have also lost their status in fewer, more tragic circumstances. Fifty-three sites are currently listed as endangered, which means they are in danger of being destroyed or severely damaged due to human conflict, natural catastrophes, climate change, tourism, and other factors. Presently, there are three rejected world heritage sites. A fourth has been partially delisted, namely Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City in England, Arabian Oryx Sanctuary in Oman, Dresden Elbe Valley in Germany, and Bagrati Cathedral in Georgia.

Reasons for Appointment of Liverpool as a World Heritage Site

In 2004, Unesco placed the city on its World Heritage List in honour of its importance in global trade in the 18th and 19th centuries. Liverpool was one of the most important ports in the United Kingdom when the British Empire gained power worldwide. 

The listing also highlighted the city’s unique maritime technologies and development methods. There, new types of docks, warehouse construction techniques, and industrial canals were devised, and it served as a model for other port towns. 

Between 1695 and 1807, the city of Liverpool was the European port most active in transporting enslaved people, according to National Museums Liverpool, with 5,300 journeys to Africa departing from its ports.

How was Liverpool Removed from the World Heritage List?

Waterfront Project 

According to the World Heritage Committee, one of the key reasons for Liverpool being removed from the world heritage list by UNESCO is a multi-billion euro development project known as Liverpool Waters. The Peel Group proposed the Liverpool Waters plan in 2010 as part of the Mersey Waters Enterprise Zone, which included the construction of numerous towers along the waterfront.  The project was given planning clearance by Liverpool City Council in 2012, prompting UNESCO to issue a warning about a “severe loss of historical authenticity” if the project went forward and classify the site as a World Heritage Site in Danger. Given the anticipated developments, UNESCO warned five years later that the property could be delisted, and these developments could result in Liverpool losing its status. Despite these concerns, Liverpool City Council has continued to accept modernist buildings in the region, claiming that the piers’ moratorium is impractical and incompatible with UK legislation.

Building of Everton Football Stadium

The planning committee of Liverpool City Council approved the construction of Everton F.C. ‘s new £500 million football stadium in the historic Bramley Moore Dock in February 2021. Secretary of State Robert Jenrick chose not to interfere, ultimately paving the way for building. The stadium’s design was well-received by the general public, with near-universal approval. At the same time, a government report revealed that the city’s regeneration department was disorganised, with some building regulations not being followed. Liverpool’s mayor, Joe Anderson, and other members of the city’s planning committee were detained on bribery and corruption accusations related to the awarding of construction contracts in the city.

Consequences of Major Projects of Liverpool

• According to Brumann, the British government did not work hard enough to keep Liverpool’s listing. “The UK could not persuade one of its committee allies to propose an amendment.” He claims that only alone, a casually dressed Culture Ministry representative attended the meeting, rather than a Foreign Ministry representative, which is unusual. 
• According to Brumann, the committee may have found this demonstration “less than persuasive” in British determination to keep Liverpool’s status. According to Brumann, Liverpool also lacked international support, even though Norway, a “highly rule-abiding country,” is on the committee, and China is the chair. “Think of Hong Kong, or British criticism of Uighur camps – China and the United Kingdom have strained diplomatic ties,” Brumann says.
• On June 21, 2021, just before the World Heritage Committee’s 44th session in Fuzhou, China, the UN institution released a report suggesting Liverpool be removed from the list of World Heritage Sites, citing non-compliance by the UK and local authorities with UN recommendations, as well as extensive modern development that hurt the area. The following month, on July 21, the World Heritage Committee voted 13–5, with two abstentions, to delist Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City as a World Heritage Site, citing “irreversible loss of features conveying the property’s extraordinary universal importance.”
•  It is only the third time a site has been removed from the UNESCO list. The World Heritage Committee claimed that the Liverpool Waters project and proposals for Everton Football Club’s new stadium will “degrade” the area’s OUV “in an irreversible process.”According to UNESCO, a place must have “Outstanding Universal Value” (OUV), which is defined as “cultural and natural significance that is so exceptional that it transcends national boundaries and is of common relevance for the present and future generations of all humanity.” 
• Smith criticised the decision as “naive” and said Unesco was “unfair” to judge Liverpool’s world heritage site by the same criteria as other cultural treasures that do not face the same challenges as major cities. UNESCO has added that Liverpool can reapply for World Heritage status in the future, but no site that has lost its place on the list has ever managed to rejoin successfully.

Conclusion 

The designation as a UNESCO World Heritage Site is a badge of honour that elevates Liverpool’s unique history worldwide. Tragically, Liverpool loses status and prestige due to poor planning and development regulation. As signatories of the UN treaty on heritage protection, the UK government is embarrassed since Liverpool has been removed from the world heritage list. Rejected world heritage sites are no longer eligible for UN conservation money, Geneva Conventions protection in the case of a war, or inclusion in tourist guidebooks around the world.