Dispatches from the World Monuments Fund: John Darlington – ADC

What’s your role at the World Monuments Fund (WMF)?

I’m the Director of Projects for the World Monuments Fund in Britain. The WMF has its central office in New York but also six affiliates around the world. I lead the projects for one of those affiliates.

What does that entail?

It means working with partners who are running restoration or interpretation programmes at heritage sites — whether it’s a historic building or an ancient monument. My role involves developing the support we provide to these projects, which might include offering expertise, connecting people, securing funding, or assembling the right resources.

On the recently unveiled WMF ‘Watch’, there’s a wide range of projects, from small to monumental. How do you explain the Watch to those questioning the balance between, say, a Birmingham Bath House, ancient earth structures in Burkina Faso and a string of sites along the Swahili coastline?

The critical thing is that the 25 sites on the most recent Watch, while small in number, are chosen because they each have a community that has reached out to us. These communities have identified a problem — be it conservation, access, or interpretation — and asked for our help. That’s the starting point.

We also strive for variety: small, single buildings to multiple sites; ancient agricultural fields in Peru to modernist cinemas in Angola. This diversity reflects the needs and lessons that can be shared globally.

Some readers working on historic buildings in the UK might feel their projects aren’t on the same level. What advice would you give them about getting started?

First, ensure you’re on our mailing list. Every two years, we announce a call for applications for the next Watch. For 2027, that process begins later this year — it’s a lengthy timeline.

When considering a nomination, think about three key aspects:

1. Is the local community central to the project?
2. What’s the significance of the site? It doesn’t need to be a World Heritage Site but should hold meaning for the community.
3. How might your work provide lessons for others globally?

For example, if you’re restoring a Methodist chapel in Wales or addressing climate change impacts in Gloucestershire, what can others learn from your approach?

And what would you say to architects looking to work on nominated or possibly nominated sites?

Start by reviewing the Watch list — not just the current one but past lists too. Most sites already have architects involved, so reach out to them and ask how you can contribute.

You talked about Bennerley Viaduct before. Can you tell us how the WMF nomination helped that project?

The Friends of Bennerley Viaduct, a young organisation without much experience in managing historic buildings, nominated the site. Our initial support was focused on helping this group build their capacity—how to conserve a place, operate as a charity, and interpret the monument.

We also provided seed funding for these activities. Their clear vision and commitment made the nomination successful, and our support boosted their confidence, enabling them to secure additional funding and take ownership of the site.

You also mentioned other examples like Gorton Monastery. What’s the model behind these successes?

It’s about building confidence. For instance, at the Gorton Monastery in Salford – which was designed by Pugin – we supported research, analysis, and small conservation efforts. This initial backing often attracts larger funders like the Heritage Lottery Fund. We provide the first push, and then other support follows.

Are there examples where things didn’t work out?

Timings can sometimes work against us. For example, with Birmingham Central Library, part of our effort to address British brutalism, the stars didn’t align and we were too late. Another example is Wentworth Woodhouse, a neoclassical mansion in South Yorkshire. Despite its significance, sensitive negotiations at the time meant we couldn’t proceed as planned.

The most recent Watch includes the moon. Who nominated it to be on the Watch?

It came from The International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) – International Scientific Committee on AeroSpace Heritage.

What should be protected on the moon and how can you protect it?

The moon holds over 90 heritage sites. When you say that, people might think, “really?” but in terms of importance – as in, significant milestones for humanity – the moon has plenty of heritage sites.

The first footprints, the first flags, the actual lunar landing model and other artefacts left by space missions all form part of those sites, for example. If you think of the great moments of humankind and great inventions, you’ve got the printing press: the great invention of the 20th century. For the 21^st century, another great scientific leap forward was to land people and craft on the moon. There you’ve got something which humanity should be celebrating and preserving. In fact there’s a whole lot of artifacts left up there, not just by the Americans but by the Russians and Chinese and various other people, too.

However, there’s no formal protection for these sites. We know that there’s an increasing interest in the moon, with renewed interest in exploration it and the potential for mining (It’s got an extraordinary array of precious materials and minerals) – and that’s a threat.

And rather than wait for some of those early heritage sites to be damaged, we’re calling for some level of protection which everyone buys into so that if there is further visitation to the moon, which there will be, these sites will be protected.

Is there precedent for this?

Similar international agreements like frameworks such as the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, already exist. That’s a really good model because it protects Antarctic heritage and is globally agreed upon. Something similar to this is what we’re looking for.