Abstract
Geodiversity is a complex environmental idea describing a spectrum of geological (together with some other natural) phenomena on a given territory. Experts have offered several opinions on what is geodiversity, and, expectedly, this multiple vision of the same idea has become challenging for practitioners, including those involved in the international geopark movement. The content of the official descriptions of 140 UNESCO global geoparks is analyzed to establish the context, in which the term “geodiversity” is used. It is established that official descriptions of only 41 of geoparks use this term. It is established that many geopark practitioners prefer to treat geodiversity either as a kind of equivalent of geological heritage (41%) or as the entity of types of unique geological phenomena (59%). In many geoparks, geodiversity is judged locally. These findings imply the existence of a gap between conceptual and practical meanings of geodiversity. Interestingly, a “simplistic” treatment of geodiversity is typical for geoparks of Europe. It is recommended to executive bodies of geopark networks and other international and national organizations to facilitate a broad vision of geodiversity in geoparks. Similarly important is to avoid full replacement of approaches for (semi-)quantitative assessment of geodiversity with general models putting geodiversity into the context of environmental philosophy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alahuhta J, Ala-Hulkko T, Tukiainen H, Purola L, Hjort J (2018) The role of geodiversity in providing ecosystem services at broad scales. Ecol Indic 91:47–56
Brilha J (2016) Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and geodiversity sites: a review. Geoheritage 8:119–134
Brilha J, Gray M, Pereira DI, Pereira P (2018) Geodiversity: an integrative review as a contribution to the sustainable development of the whole of nature. Environ Sci Policy 86:19–28
Chapleo C, Durán MVC, Díaz AC (2011) Do UK universities communicate their brands effectively through their websites? J Mark High Educ 21:25–46
Costanza R, dArge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, Oneill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260
Costanza R, de Groot R, Braat R, Kubiszewski I, Fioramonti L, Sutton P, Farber S, Grasso M (2017) Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosyst Serv 28:1–16
Crofts R (2014) Promoting geodiversity: learning lessons from biodiversity. Proc Geol Assoc 125:263–266
Gordon JE, Crofts R, Díaz-Martínez E, Woo KS (2018) Enhancing the role of geoconservation in protected area management and nature conservation. Geoheritage 10:191–203
Gray M (2011) Other nature: geodiversity and geosystem services. Environ Conserv 38:271–274
Gray M (2012) Valuing geodiversity in an ‘ecosystem services’ context. Sottish Geogr J 128:177–194
Gray M (2013) Geodiversity. Valuing and conserving abiotic nature. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 495 pp
Henriques MH, Brilha J (2017) UNESCO Global Geoparks: a strategy towards global understanding and sustainability. Episodes 40:349–355
Henriques MH, dos Reis P, Brilha R, Mota J, T (2011) Geoconservation as an emerging geoscience. Geoheritage 3:117–128
Holt A (2006) Biodiversity definitions vary within the discipline. Nature 444:146
Knight J (2011) Evaluating geological heritage: correspondence on Ruban, D.A. ‘Quantification of geodiversity and its loss’ (PGA, 2010, 121(3): 326–333). Proc Geol Assoc 122:508–510
Kuleta M (2018) Geodiversity research methods in geotourism. Geosciences 8:197
Lee K-H (2017) Does size matter? evaluating corporate environmental disclosure in the Australian mining and metal industry: a combined approach of quantity and quality measurement. Bus Strat Environ 26:209–223
Lovelock JE (1972) Gaia as seen through the atmosphere. Atmos Environ 6:579–580
Lovelock JE (1990) Hands up for the Gaia hypothesis. Nature 344:100–102
Meinard Y, Sylvain C, Bernhard S (2014) A constructivist approach toward a general definition of biodiversity. Ethics Policy Environ 17, 88–104
Necheş IM (2016) Geodiversity beyond material evidence: a geosite type based interpretation of geological heritage. Proc Geol Assoc 127:78–89
Pătru-Stupariu I, Stupariu M-S, Stiocesu I, Peringer A, Buttler A, Fürst C (2017) Integrating geo-biodiversity features in the analysis of landscape patterns. Ecol Ind 80:363–375
Pumain D (2017) Urban dynamics and geo-diversity: from theory to modeling. Mitt Österr Geogr Ges 159:7–22
Reynard E, Brilha J (eds) (2017) Geoheritage: assessment, protection, and management. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 482
Ruban DA (2010) Quantification of geodiversity and its loss. Proc Geol Assoc 121:326–333
Ruban DA (2011) How diverse should be geodiversity? Reply to Knight “Evaluating geological heritage” (Proc. Geol. Assoc. (2011)). Proc Geol Assoc 122:511–513
Ruban DA (2017) Geodiversity as a precious national resource: a note on the role of geoparks. Resour Policy 53:103–108
Ruse M (2013) The Gaia hypothesis. Science on a pagan planet. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, p 251
Sallam ES, Fathy EE, Ruban DA, Ponedelnik AA, Yashalova NN (2018) Geological heritage diversity in the Faiyum Oasis (Egypt): a comprehensive assessment. J Afr Earth Sc 140:212–224
Schmeller DS, Mihoub J-B, Bowser A, Arvanitidis C, Costello MJ, Fernandez M, Geller GN, Hobern D, Kissling WD, Regan E, Saarenmaa H, Turak E, Isaac NJB (2017) An operational definition of essential biodiversity variables. Biodivers Conserv 26:2967–2972
Serrano E, Ruiz-Flaño P (2007) Geodiversity. A theoretical and applied concept. Geogr Helv 62:140–147
Wimbledon WAP, Smith-Meyer S (eds) (2012) Geoheritage in Europe and its conservation. ProGEO, Oslo, p 405
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully thank the journal editor and the both, anonymous reviewers for their useful suggestions, as well as M.H. Henriques (Portugal) and W. Riegraf (Germany) for help with literature.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ruban, D.A., Yashalova, N.N. Geodiversity meanings in global geoparks: an empirical study. Environ Earth Sci 77, 771 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7962-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7962-9