Assessing the Capabilities of Geomorphotourim of Geoheritage with an approach to Economic Development and Environmental Sustainability (Case Study: Geomorphosites of Badab-e Surt)

Document Type : scientific-research article

Authors

• Amir Saffari ¹
• Saeed Rahimi Herabadi ¹
• Hadi Karimi ¹
• Mohammad Alizadeh ²

¹ Kharazmi University

² Allameh Tabataba'i University

https://doi.org/10.22067/geography.v16i2.48486

Abstract

Extended Abstract

Introduction

The main approaches of geotourism and geomorphotourism are development-oriented, protective and scientific to assess the capability of geoheritages. Today through the development of studies in this subcategory of geomorphology, several subfields such as geodiversity, geoconservation, geointerpretation, and so forth have been released which their aim is sustainability and regional development in environmental, economic, and social aspects of human society, especially native societies. Thus, the aim of this paper is to assess the geoheritages potential for scientific promotion, regional development, and the protection of geoheritages in the study area.

Review of Literature

The values given to a geomorphosite have two important elements: scientific and complementary values, including historical and cultural, environmental, economic, and aesthetic values. Grandeurard (2003) highlights the importance of geomorphosites in the important role of identifying history and rebuilding the Earth's history. Others scholars, such as Paisente and Paniza (2001), also emphasize cultural, historical, ecological and economic values. In general, a relevant fact in this field is a hybrid vision which not only provides the areas of economic development but also protects the rules. Some landforms, such as karstic forms in caves, fossils, springs, etc. will be damaged very soon. The degradation of geomorphic cultures is associated with false tourism activities and their lack of awareness. These issues reveal the necessity and status of the protection of the legacy of the Earth. Geological heritage conservation can take many forms, including the creation of physical barriers in geomorphic space, the establishment of protective laws and regulations, and the establishment of protected areas such as geoparks. The ultimate goal of these methods and policies is to protect, enhance and promote geomorphic processes and samples. In this paper, we attempt to have a comprehensive assessment of geoheritage conservation using a combined model from the current models of geomorphosites potential assessment and field works. We also offer a comprehensive and indigenous model as an organization and a platform for the development and sustainability of the environment.

Method

In this paper, we attempt to have a comprehensive assessment of geoheritage conservation using a combined model from current models of geomorphosites potential assessment and field works. The structure of this model is based on effective criteria and components (with a score of 0-10) according to Badab-e Surt springs characteristics following three main topics: geomorphic personal knowledge, tourism infrastructures, and geoheritage protection.  They suggest organized actions for using this geoheritage based on the proposed method.

Results and Discussion

Results of field and library studies, map analysis, etc. in the study area show the high potentials of Badab-e Surt springs in geomorphological science and personal knowledge with a score of 51.5 (out of maximum 60). In contrast, tourism infrastructures with a score of 25.5 (out of maximum 70) and protection issue with a total score of 27.5 (out of maximum 70) are at a low level. It is notable that the sum of scores is gained from the results of scores obtained from filed and library studies.

5. Conclusion

According to this model assessment, Badab-e Surt geomorphosite has very high value in geomorphological knowledge criteria due to scarcity, geodiversity, educational and beauty values and suitable potentials for tourism planning and investing, but current infrastructures (unsuitable roads and services,…) and protection condition factors (despite the drafting of protective laws) are in very low and far from the optimum condition to protect and even to introduce this phenomenon and there are no effective and organized facilities such as brochure and fence near this sensitive geomorphosite. Therefore, the crowds of tourists on the surface of the springs will lead to destroy Badab-e Surt springs in short time. In addition, a natural hazard such as drought is an extra threatening factor. So it is clear that geoconservation factor, that is, an approach with protective efforts such as physical fences, warning signs, and so on are highly necessary to protect this geomorphosite. The lack of attention to sustainability and conservation issue in the economic and tourism development program in this area will not lead to much stability to achieve geoconservational golas, and if this geoheritage site has the sustainable development, it will provide the economic development for the local community.
According to the results of this paper and similar research regarding the pathology of tourism policy in the country, we can conclude that economic planning and development in tourism are not along with the protection of land heritage (sustainability perception) and entrepreneurship infrastruture, especially for native societies, and the process of comprehensive attitudes has not been considered in this process. One of the ways to tackle this issue is to design native models appropriate for the conditions of each region, which will be one of the first steps in economic and environmental sustainability. On the other hand, the implementation of such management patterns requires the attention and utilization of interdisciplinary knowledge, especially the geographic sciences. In other words, tourism climate, regional planning, rural planning, and so on are some ways to complement those goals.
 

Keywords

• Geomorphotourism
• Geomorphosite
• Economic Development
• Geoheritage
• Conservation
• Badab Surt

20.1001.1.20081391.1397.16.2.3.1

References

1. امری‌کاظمی، ع. (۱۳۹۱). اطلس میراث زمین‌شناختی ایران. تهران: انتشارات ماه ‌و ما.

2. صفاری، ا؛ رحیمی‌هرآبادی، س؛ هدائی‌آرانی، م؛ احمدی، م. (1393). ارزیابی ‌توانمندی ژئومورفوسایت‌های گردشگری در پایداری و مدیریت مناطق‌‌کارستیک‌ (مطالعة ‎‌موردی: غار چال ‌نخجیر، استان ‌مرکزی). آمایش جغرافیایی فضا، 14، 36- 19.

3. قربانی، ر؛ آستین‌چیده. م؛ مهری، م. (1389). ژئوتوریسم: بهره‌گیری از جاذبه‌های‌ ژئومور-فیک و زمین‌شناختی دره‌های کوهستانی، نمونة ‌موردی: درة سیمین در جنوب همدان. برنامه‌ریزی و آمایش فضا، 14 (4)، 22-1.

4. مختاری، د. (1389). ارزیابی توانمندی اکوتوریستی مکان‌های ‌ژئومورفیکی حوضة ‌آبریز آسیاب ‌خرابه در شمال‎ غرب ‌ایران به روش پرالونگ. جغرافیا و توسعه، 18، 52-27.

5. مقیمی، ا؛ رحیمی‌هرآبادی، س؛ هدائی‌آرانی، م؛ علیزاده، م؛ اروجی. ح. ‌(1391). ژئومورفو-توریسم و قابلیت ‌‌‌سنجی ژئومورفوسایت‌های‌ جاده‌ای با بهره‌گیری ازروش‌پری‌یرا (مطالعة‌ ‌‌موردی: آزادراه‌ قم- کاشان). تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی، 27، 190-169.

6. نکویی‌صدری، ب. (1391). آغازی بر مطالعه‌ ژئومورفوسایت‌ها. مجموعه مقالات همایش ملی ژئومورفولوژی و زیستگاه انسان. دانشگاه تهران، دانشکدة جغرافیا، انجمن ایرانی ژئومورفولوژی. اسفند 1391. صص. 136-134.

7. یمانی، م؛ نگهبان، س؛ رحیمی‌هرآبادی، س؛ علیزاده، م. (1391). ژئومورفوتوریسم و مقایسة‌ روش‌های ارزیابی ژئومورفوسایت‌ها در توسعظ‌ گردشگری ‌(مطالعة موردی: استان‌ هرمزگان). ‌برنامه‌‌‌ریزی و توسعة ‌گردشگری، 1 (1)، 104-87.

8. Bruschi, V. M., Cendrero, A., & Cuesta Albertos, J. A. (2011). A Statistical approach to the validation and optimization of geoheritage assessment procedures. Geoheritage,3(3), 131-149.

9. Comanescu, L., Nedelea, A., & Dobre, R. (2011). The evaluation of geomorphosites in Vistea Valley (Fagaras Mountains-Carpathians, Romania). International Journal of Physical Sciences, 6(5), 1161-1168.

10. Fassoulas, Ch., Mouriki D., Dimitriou-Nikolakis P. G. I. (2011). Quantitative assessment of geotopes as an effective tool for geoheritage management. Geoheritage, 21(3), 245-264.

11. Fennell, D. A. (2009). Ecotourism: An introduction. London: Routledge.

12. Feuillet, T., & Sourp, E. (2011). Geomorphological heritage of the Pyrenees National Park (France): Assessment, clustering and promotion of geomorphosites. Geoheritage, 3(3), 151-162.

13. Joseli, M. P., Eliane, A. D., & Denise, D. (2011). Geoparks in Brazil-strategy of Geoconservation and Development. Geoheritage, 3(4), 289-298.

14. Lugeri, F. R., Amadio, V., Bagnaia, R., Cardillo, A., & Lugeri, N. (2011). Landscapes and wine production areas: A geomorphological heritage. Geoheritage, 5(3), 221–232.

15. Maran, A. (2011). Valuing the geological heritage of Serbia. Bulletin of the Natural History Museum, 5(3), 47-66.

16. May, V. (1993). Coastal, tourism, geomorphology and geological conservation: The example of South England, tourism vs. environment (The case for coastal areas). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

17. Pereira, P., Pereira, D., Caetano, M., & Braga, A. (2007). Geomorphosite assessment in Montesinho Natural Park (Portugal). Geographica Helvetica Jg. 62 2007/Heft 3, 21(1) , 15-168.

18. Pralong, J. (2005). A method for assessing the tourist potential and the use of geomorphological sites, geomorphologie, Relief, Processes. Environment, 11(3), 189- 196.

19. Reynard, E., Fontana, G., Kozlik, L., & Scapozza, C. (2007). A method for assessing scientific and additional values of geomorphosites. Geographica Helvetica Jg. 62(3) 2007/ Heft 3. pp 148-158 Sai-Leung, N. G., Jiangfeng, L. I., Shiming, F., Young, C.Y. (2010). Geodiversity and geoconservation in Hong Kong. Asian Geographer,27(3), 1-11.

20. Sai-leung, N. G., Jiangfeng, L. I., Shiming, F., Young C.Y. NG.(2010). Geodiversity and Geoconservation in Hong Kong; Asian Geographer, 27, 1-11.

21. Warowna, J., Zgłobicki, W., Gajek, G., Telecka, M., Kołodyńska, R., & Zieliński, P. (2014). Geomorphosite assessment in the proposed Geopark Vistula River Gap (Poland). Quaestions Geographicae, 33(3), 173-181.

22. Zomorrodian, M. J. (2004, August). Geomorphotourism of the Caspian Sea’s southern coasts, challenges, and threatening factors. Paper presented at the 30th Congress of the International Geographical Union, Tourism, and Leisure Sessions, Glasgow, Scotland.

23. Zouros, N. C. (2007). Geomorphosite assessment and management in protected areas of Greece (Case study of the Lesvos Island-Coastal Geomorphosites. Geographica Helvetica, 5(62), 169-180.