Sites on the World Heritage List should be more diverse.

I just came accross this article and was wandering what other people think of it.

In brief Andrew Blackwell (the author) argues that that there should be more diversity in the World Heritage List. He bemoans that most of the sites seem to be on the list for their aesthetic merit rather than their impact on history. He asks "why isn't Chernobyl on the World Heritage List?"  The accidental wilderness sanctuary of Chernobyl’s 19-mile-radius exclusion zone, radioactive wolves and all, easily clears the bar set by rule four. Perversely, considering the circumstances of its creation, the Zone is also a shoe-in for “exceptional natural beauty”.

So what do you think?

As it may be useful the selection criteria for World Heritage sites are:

1. to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius;
2. to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design;
3. to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared;
4. to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;
5. to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change;
6. to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria);
7. to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;
8. to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features;
9. to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems and communities of plants and animals;
10. to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.