Skopje, 1 February 2022 (MIA) – It is possible to meet the requirements set by UNESCO for the Ohrid region to preserve the world heritage status. Building near and around Lake Ohrid should be strictly regulated by urban planning. Hotels involved in tourism should comply with the city or else they should understand that they will have to give up their world heritage status, Japanese architect Yamasaki Masafumi told MIA in an interview. Masafumi, who is an honorary professor at the Ritsumeikan University born in 1947, is also a member of the City Planning Institute of Japan (CPIJ) and the ICOMOS Japan National Committee. The Kyoto University graduate tomorrow will hold a lecture on the conservation of lakes, namely balancing of preservation of the environment and regional and tourist promotion of Lake Ohrid through adequate management of world heritage sites. The lecture is organized by the Japanese embassy in Skopje and the Japanese embassy in Tirana alongside the JICA Alumni Association Macedonia. Professor Yamasaki, you will give a lecture on the conservation of the environment in line with tourism promotion for Lake Ohrid and appropriate management with the UNESCO-declared world heritage. What are your conclusions about the situation in Ohrid and what should be the starting point in order to find balance between these three points? What are the appropriate criteria that should be respected without decreasing the attractiveness of the region as a tourist location? These three points are related to each other. If any one of them is missing, tourism cannot be promoted. The situation is different for each World Heritage Site. What is the case of Lake Ohrid? The determination of the local people is important. It is important to promote tourism, but this alone will be a setback. The management of the World Heritage Site and the preservation of the environment may be possible on their own, but it will be difficult to get the support of the public. Lake Ohrid has temporarily avoided being included in UNESCO’s List of Heritage in Danger. The country has a deadline of two years to fulfill UNESCO’s requirements, but we need professionals, funds and a lot of work. Do you think in this timeframe it is possible for all of the problems to be resolved? Which are the key steps that should be taken? Is this country capable enough to fulfill UNESCO’s requirements and are we going to keep our natural treasure? I am an expert in cultural heritage conservation and I don't know if it is possible for the country to fulfill UNESCO’s requirements in two years. Isn't Lake Ohrid a World Heritage Site? It is also important to preserve the historic city centre around the lake. I think this can be done in two years if you hurry. For the preservation of the nature of Lake Ohrid, it seems impossible to build more houses or more hotels to accommodate more tourists. It would have to be strictly regulated by urban planning. I am not familiar with your country. It would be difficult to unify the understanding and attitude of the citizens in the city. The question is to what extent you are doing that. Several months have passed since the deadline issued by UNESCO and some requirements have been conducted, however it seems like there is not a huge progress made in Ohrid and the Ohrid region aimed at maintaining the UNESO World Heritage status. What are your recommendations? What has been done wrong and where should the attention be focused? I am not sure what could have been done. The policy of preserving the historic city, especially in terms of urban planning, is important. Of course, the intentions of cultural heritage specialists are also important. I think it is important to take up the challenge of preserving the local cultural heritage.\ In terms of cities, it is important to preserve the landscape. you need a detailed system of height regulation and control of colour and design. In addition to other problems, Lake Ohrid sewage water and rubbish is released in Lake Ohrid especially during the summer at the peak of the tourist season. How is this problem solvable? Could you give us an example for a similar experience? The capacity of sewage treatment plants needs to be improved. If there is not enough sewage treatment, that is a problem. In Japan, as a rule, there are no rubbish bins on the street and tourists take their rubbish home with them. There are bins at food stalls and vending machines, and only the rubbish from these bins is collected. I would suggest that the city or the country to make awareness among visitors for such effort like we have done in Japan. If you don't, then the city will have to get more waste disposal staff to take care of the waste. Illegally built facilities (bars and restaurants) have been a huge problem in the region despite the intensive campaign to demolish such buildings. On the other hand, tourist workers believe that by the demolition of the illegally built facilities, also considered tourist attractions, the offer for the tourists has been decreased and their businesses have been ruined. Is there a way for them to find a balance and have facilities which will attract tourists and save the environment at the same time? Hotels involved in tourism should comply with the city or else they should understand that they will have to give up their World Heritage status. I think it's one or the other. Even if you don't build hotels and only have daytime tourists, you can increase the number of tourists. With the promise of no rubbish. If I think about tourism in the region, I can think about bringing tourists to other lakes, to the cities around Prespa Lake. There, you could build a new building with a roof and a historical shape, and invite tourists to come there. I think you should think about the townscape that tourists are looking for. What are the regulations in Japan regarding construction on lake shores? Is it allowed at all to build near the shore? In Japan, it is common to put conditions on development, such as designating it as a "scenic zone". Strict conditions are imposed on the building coverage ratio and other factors. In Lake Biwa, construction is prohibited within 10 metres of the shore of the lake. In Italy, the Galasso Law prohibits development within 300 metres of the shore of the lake. However, areas defined by previous urban planning are given special exceptions. How do you develop tourism in such places and keep the environment safe? It is possible to combine tourism with keeping the environment safe. However,in the case of Lake Ohrid, it is impossible to combine the preservation of the environment with the development of tourism, because the lake is an ancient environment. This is my opinion. If it is allowed to develop tourism in the cities on the shore of the lake, there should be proper conditions. We should impose strict conditions on where we can build, the building coverage ratio, the floor area ratio, the disposal of sewage, the disposal of waste, etc. How about the state of the lakes in Japan? How many of them are under the protection of UNESCO? How are those lakes managed? Which policies and practices are conducted in order to protect those lakes? There are no such registered lakes in Japan. Instead we have the example of Yakushima, an island which has been designated a World Heritage Site. Here, too, the problem is the increase in the number of tourists and the disposal of their urine. At present they are stored in buckets. They should build a treatment plant to dispose of the urine, but they don't have the budget to do so.There was a proposal to stop more tourists coming to the island, but it was rejected by the local people.