Discussion Forum

Geotourism: A new Form o f Tourism util ising natural Landscapes and based on Imagination and Emotion

J E A N - P I E R R E P R A L O N G

A b s t r a c t Tourists and visitors currently tend to consider environment and the purity of nature, educational

tourism, culture and history, large- and small-scale events, and entertainment and fun as crucial issues.

For certain specific target groups, these wishes and needs may be satisfied by a new form of tourism

called "geotourism", which is an multi-interest kind of tourism exploiting natural sites and landscapes

containing interesting earth-science features in a didactic and entertaining way. Relative to demand, a

form of tourism based on imagination and emotion, favouring experience and sensations, and explain­

ing the natural environment by playing with its temporal and spatial dimensions may provide opportuni­

ties of economic development. Different target groups (e.g. seniors, families, schools) potentially inter­

ested in cultural and natural landscapes seem to constitute specific markets to consider. In this sense,

on-site interpretation needs to be more adapted to the visitors' expectations and a more original and

striking way of communication has to be used. From a promotional point of view, "geomarketing", a

kind of image communication that explores the temporal and spatial dimensions of the rocks (e.g. min­

erals, fossils) and forms (e.g. glaciers, caves) of the Earth's surface, may be developed. This will not only

generate inquisitiveness among the target groups selected, but also give a clear position to a destination,

in order to distinguish itself from similar territories. Of course, product communication must complete

this marketing strategy with the creation, promotion and sale of specific and original products, especial­

ly for the summer period (from spring to autumn). For instance, a mix of walking, wellness, "agro-

tourism" and "geotourism" may be profitable for regional economic development. Thus, this paper is a

conceptual contribution based on a theoretical work and a literature review.

Key words: education tourism, natural landscapes, Earth science, tourist demand, marketing strategy,

regional development.

1 Introduction From 1970-1975, qualitative forms of tourism emerged linked with a diversifica­tion of demand and visitors' behaviour. This progressive return of a qualitative ap­proach created new kinds of tourist activi­ties, such as cultural, industrial, wellness or discovery tourism. This trend also charac­terises the beginning of 21st century, no­tably for "experienced" tourists (Durand & Jouvet 2003). As a consequence of this evo­lution, demand is currently diversified and segmented, with visitors tending to consid­er environment, education, events and en­tertainment (4 E) as crucial issues (Moruc-ci 2003). For some specific target groups, these desires and needs may be satisfied by a new form of tourism called "geotourism". As developed below, geotourism is a multi-interest kind of tourism that utilises natur­al sites and landscapes containing interest­ing earth-science features. Its aim is to pro­

mote geology and geomorphology in a di­dactic way — see Badman 1994 and Page 1994 for comments on the ensuing goods and services and their goals — with social, ecological and economic benefits. Various precursory countries such as Germany (Mattig 2003) or China (Xun & Ting 2003) have understood the potential of geot­ourism for regional and economic develop­ment, for instance by the way of geoparcs — spaces dedicated to Earth science promo­tion in order to optimise and protect the ge­ological and geomorphological heritage, but which are also perceived as an econom­ic resource (Eder 1999).

This paper is a conceptual contribution based on a theoretical work and a literature review; from these issues, practical perspec­tives are also proposed. Therefore, this pa­per first defines geotourism more accurate­ly in relation to some natural and cultural

Jean-Pierre Pralong, Ph. D.,

Assistant (young researcher),

Institut o f Geography, University o f Lausanne

Humense, Dorigny

CH-1015 Lausanne

Phone: +41-21-692 3063

Fax: +41-21-692 3075

E-Mail: jean-pierre.pralong@>unil.ch

2 0 Tourism Review, Vol 61, No 3/2006

J.-P. Pralong: Geotourism

aspects. The geoscientific, scenic, cultural, economic and ecological interests of natur­al landscapes are then evoked in order to highlight their tourist value; the ensuing uses, in terms of heritage and resource, point out the different ways of utilisation of such potentials. The theoretical frame-work presented as a result of this will allow us a better understanding of the various components of supply and demand (e.g. kinds of stakeholders and action process­es). Because an optimal response to the ex­pressed demand needs to take into account social, ecological and economic factors, three phases of analysis, called "optimisa­tion", "exploitation" and "transformation", are detailed, in order to demonstrate the life cycle of the sites and landscapes consid­ered. Finally, characteristics and trends of the current demand allow the future stakes of geotourist activities to be revealed, no­tably in terms of on-site interpretation, im­age communication ("geomarketing") and products development, in order to create a product better adapted to current demand.

2 Definition of geotourism

Geotourism may be defined by two differ­ent ways. The first considers aspects of pro­tection, the second those of optimisation. According to the National Geographic So­ciety, geotourism is perceived as a form of tourism "that sustains or enhances the ge­ographical character of a place - its envi­ronment, heritage, aesthetics, culture, and the well-being of its residents" . Therefore, its aim tends to "extend ecotourism princi­ples beyond nature travel". With this defin­ition, utilised by the Travel Industry Agency (United States of America), geotourists are defined as "those who are quite conscious of the environment and are inclined to seek culture and unique experiences when they travel". Other definitions, proposed by sci­entists rather than tourist stakeholders, consider more specifically the essential components of natural landscapes, which are rocks (e.g. stones, minerals, fossils, etc.) and forms (e.g. streams, glaciers, caves, etc.) of the Earth's surface. For instance, Hose perceives geotourism to be "the provision of interpretative facilities and services to promote the value and social benefit of ge­ologic and geomorphologic sites and their materials and to ensure their conservation, for the use of students, tourists and other casual recreationalists". This definition

underlines the crucial issues of geotourist activities mentioned above (i.e. promotion and conservation). In a more synthetic way, Larwood and Prosser (1998) consider that geotourism allows tourists and visitors "travelling in order to experience, learn from and enjoy our Earth heritage". From our point of view, Hose's proposal provides the more complete definition, although it does not include the economic develop­ment generated by this form of tourism.

More concretely, geotourism may be understood in relation to natural and cul­tural tourism. In the former case, the use of outdoor and rural spaces is the main simi­larity , although urban geotourist activities also exist (Larwood & Prosser 1996). In the latter, geotourism includes elements of cul­tural tourism (Origet de Cluzeau 1998), be­cause it implies a search for knowledge and emotions through the discovery of a her­itage and its territory. In this sense, rocks and forms of the Earth's surface - manifes­tations and memories of the Earth history - are considered as a heritage (Eder 1999), since they are essential components of the landscape, possessing not only natural characteristics, but cultural attributes as well (Reynard 2005). For instance, Ayers Rock (Australia) is a site and a landscape freighted with cultural meanings (i.e. reli­gious interests for native people) as is Thingvellir (Iceland) — in terms of political identification (i.e. place of the first Ice­landic Parliament). Finally, geotourism may constitute a segment of ecotourism, which is "a sustainable form of natural re­source-based tourism that focuses primari­ly on experiencing and learning about na­ture, and which is ethically managed to be low-impact, non-consumptive, and locally oriented (control, benefits and scale). It typically occurs in natural areas, and should contribute to the conservation or preservation of such areas" (Fenell 2003).

After these preliminary comments, it should be obvious that, on the one hand, geotourist activities consider not only the geoscientific, but also the scenic, cultural, economic and ecological potentials of a landscape - thus creating its tourist value (see below) -, and that, on the other hand, the existence of natural and cultural her­itages as well as economic and landscape re­sources generates specific uses (Pralong 2005).

3 Theoretical framework

Figure 1 shows a systemic approach to tourist and geotourist activities, structured by three analysis phases called "optimisa­tion", "exploitation" and "transformation" (in italic on the chart). Geological and geo-morphological sites and landscapes are first defined as manifestations and memo­ries of the Earth history by the relationship between natural and social and economic systems (Pralong & Reynard 2005). For the natural system, geosphere, hydrosphere and cryosphere are mainly concerned. For the social and economic system, five kinds of stakeholders (economic, political, cul­tural, scientific and population and visi­tors) are recognised. The "optimisation" phase consists in assigning values to the sites and landscapes concerned, in relation to ecological and social considerations. As mentioned above, geoscientific, scenic, cul­tural, economic and ecological values (see Panizza & Piacente 1993, 2003 and Quar-anta 1993 for their precise definitions) are perceived as components of the tourist val­ue, also called "original product" by Barras (1987). The attraction of the tourist value induces two kinds of use (natural and cul­tural heritages as well as economic and landscape resources) both understood in terms of protection and/or utilisation (see Pralong & Reynard 2005 for examples).

The second phase then considers the social and economic exploitation of the original product, thus creating the "derived product" (Barras 1987). For tourist as well as for geotourist aspects, basic infrastruc­tures, productive activities (e.g. access, ac­commodation) and specialised goods and services are necessary (e.g. guided tour or booklet, cable car or via ferrata). To define the potential and diversity of the demand, several elements must be taken into ac­count, such as the kind of visitors (tourists or day-trippers), social and demographic factors (e.g. marital status, age, profession­al training) as well as permissive and incita-tive ones (Barras 1987). Consideration of the last two factors is crucial in order to sat­isfy the demand of the various target groups, because they include income and free time and above all wishes and needs of the visitors (Knafou et al. 1997, Stock et al. 2003). Therefore, behaviour and actions of the different target groups (effective de­mand) may be understood, and the compo­nents of the derived product adapted as re­quired.

Tourism Review, Vol 6 1 , No 3/2006 21

Discussion Forum

2 2 Tourism Review, Vol 6 1 , No 3/2006

J.-P. Pralong: Geotourism

Finally, the derived product necessarily induces an economic and ecological trans­formation (third analysis' phase) influenc­ing the integrity of the sites and landscapes considered, which also record this evolution as manifestations and memories of the Earth history. As a result of this fact, social and economic processes may modify the natural system, for instance, by the way of positive or negative impacts (e.g. discovery of dinosaur pathways, destruction of a par­ticular landscape) (Marty & Hug 2003). Moreover, natural processes may transform the social and economic system by the exis­tence of risks — owing to the addition of hazard and vulnerability (Cavallin & Mar-chetti 1995, Rivas et al. 1997) — and natural changes (e.g. melt of glaciers, evolution of karstic caves). Therefore, such natural and human evolutions modify the initial values of the sites and landscapes considered, as well as characteristics of both product sup­ply and demand. Consequences for (geo) tourist activities may be, for instance, a loss of interest, an improvement in attractive­ness or an increase in risk (Pralong 2005).

In this way, each change in geoscientif-ic, scenic, cultural, economic and ecological values may create the onset of a new life cy­cle, in terms of supply and demand (Chade-faud 1988, Biot & Gauchon 2005), and also generate different generations of geological and geomorphological sites and landscapes as well as tourist and economic resources.

4 Demand trends: a lucky break for geotourism

Currently, the trends in demand correspond to what geotourist activities may propose to visitors in terms of original product. As pre­sented in the introduction, it is widely agreed that tourists and day-trippers con­sider environment and pure nature, educa­tional tourism, culture and history, events and mega events, and entertainment and fun as crucial issues (Morucci 2003). Thus, a form of tourism utilising natural landscapes in a didactic and entertaining way, and based on imagination and emotion in rela­tion to Earth history, may provide interest­ing economic developments. Because of the emergence of an "emotion culture "(Origet du Cluzeau & Vicériat 2000) and the current relevance of images in post-modern societies (Amirou 1999), visitors more and more pre­fer kinds of tourism that favour experience and sensations. For instance, the Ardèche re­

gion of France has understood this fact and proposes tourist products that create the ef­fect of a trip through time, in order to dis­tinguish itself from similar territories (Mangeant & Dany 1999). In this case, be­hind the discovery of a new karstic cave in 1994 — containing the oldest wall-paintings in the world — the approach chosen, based on imagination and disorientation, creates a consistent link between the elements of the tourist product and the original natural and cultural resources of the destination.

Regarding geotourism, "there is a strong demand for translating the geologi­cal knowledge acquired through field sur­vey into more explicit popular initiatives. These needs come from the education world, tourist operators and civic, cultural and trekking and climbing organisations (which would like to further develop moun­tain activities not only for competitive sport purposes but also for cultural and scientific ones)" (Tommasi 2002). As expressed by this author, and confirmed by a current study (Pralong 2006b), the demand for ex­planatory commentaries is important for natural sites and landscapes with Earth sci­ence features of interest. Different target groups (e.g. seniors, families, schools) po­tentially interested in natural and cultural landscapes seem to constitute specific mar­kets to consider. According to Siegrist (2000), a theoretical market of 80 million visitors interested in trips relative to nature and culture exists in Europe. To satisfy this demand, on-site interpretation needs to be more adapted to the expectations of tourists and day-trippers and more original and striking ways of communication have to be deployed. Indeed, a fashionable desti­nation is a place where the imaginative ex­pectations and needs of visitors are consid­ered and translated into specific products.

In this way, Earth science may help tourist stakeholders to utilise natural land­scapes as providers of imagination and emo­tion, beyond their scenic value. For instance, plenty of territories provide evidence of tropical seas (e.g. Mount Everest), oceanic volcanoes (e.g. the Matterhorn) or impres­sive glaciers (e.g. the Sahara) which disap­peared millions years ago (Hose 1998, Marthaler 2002). Explaining the natural and everyday environment by playing with these temporal and spatial dimensions may enter­tain tourists and day-trippers, especially lay-men in Earth science. For this numerous tar­get group, on-site interpretation must func­tion in interactive ways (Bringer 1993):

■ stimulate inquisitiveness, interest in a to­pic rather than educate;

■ create links between a place or a topic and the visitors' experience;

■ create links between past and current facts as well as local and worldwide situa­tions;

■ ask crucial and new questions relative to the place or the topic presented;

■ give pieces of information by telling a sto­ry (and not by a scientific talk).

From a promotional point of view, a linking thematic (e.g. "a trip through time", "from the sea to the mountain") must in­clude all goods and services produced and projected, in order to provide a positive and consistent image to the destination con­cerned (Tiberghien 1997). Earth science may be used to promote this through what we call "geomarketing", a kind of image communication that exploits the temporal and spatial dimensions of the rocks and forms of the destination in question (Pra­long 2006a); for this, a collaboration be­tween geoscientists and marketing profes­sionals is necessary. In this case, "competi­tive advantages" depend on the interests and diversity of the local and regional geol­ogy and geomorphology. An alpine desti­nation with fossilised oceanic volcanoes or coral reefs within its territory may propose this kind of promotional approach. On the one hand, it will generate inquisitiveness among the target groups selected (Moisset 1997). On the other hand, it will position the destination clearly from a symbolic and emotional point of view (Arino 1999). Ob­viously, product communication must complete this marketing strategy with the creation, promotion and sale of specific and original products (sets of tourist and geotourist goods and services), in order to concretely satisfy demand. Regarding geot­ourism, these products especially concern the summer period (from spring to au­tumn), which has been up to now neglect­ed, but seems to have a real potential for de­velopment because of its positive image (Origet du Cluzeau & Vicériat 2000).

On a regional scale, a mix of walking, wellness, agrotourism and geotourism may be profitable in terms of added value, given that walking notably is a high potential prod­uct (Origet du Cluzeau & Vicériat 2000). In this way, the summer mountain may com­pete with the "sea product" by utilising its natural and cultural heritages, in order to make itself more physically, mentally and economically accessible (Mathelet 2002).

Tourism Review, Vol 6 1 , No 3/2006 23

Discussion Forum

5 Synthesis and perspectives

From 1970-1975, qualitative forms of tourism emerged linked with a diversifica­tion of demand and of visitors' behaviour. Currently, tourists and day-trippers tend to consider environment and pure nature, ed­ucational tourism, culture and history, events and mega events, and entertainment and fun as crucial issues. As a new form of tourism, geotourism may satisfy the wishes and needs of specific target groups (e.g. se­niors, families, schools), because it uses nat­ural sites and landscapes — manifestations and memories of the Earth history — as providers of imagination and emotion, favouring experience and sensations. In this sense, Earth science may help tourist stakeholders to utilise rocks and forms of the Earth's surface in a didactic and enter­taining way.

Regarding on-site interpretation, ex­plaining the natural and everyday environ­ment by playing with its temporal and spa­tial dimensions seems to be more adapted to visitors' expectations, given that numer­ous landscapes bear witness to the exis­tence of tropical seas, oceanic volcanoes or impressive glaciers which disappeared mil­lions years ago. From a promotional point of view, a more original and striking com­munication of a destination's image using these dimensions ("geomarketing") should be developed; for this, collaborations be­tween geoscientists and marketing profes­sionals are necessary. This will not only generate inquisitiveness among the target groups selected, but also give a clear posi­tion to the destinations concerned, in order to distinguish themselves from similarter-ritories. Obviously, a policy of product communication must complete this mar­keting strategy with the creation, promo­tion and sale of specific and original prod­ucts, especially for the summer period (from spring to autumn).

Therefore, geotourism may be a com­ponent of regional economic development, generating profitable tourism. This is a re­alistic perspective, given its different ad­vantages: ■ a potential for sustainable growth, whe­

reas ski markets are more or less decli­ning in the majority of alpine destina­tions;

■ a tourist development requiring fewer in­vestments and infrastructures than for winter tourism, and having a good cost-benefit ratio;

■ a better distribution between summer and winter nights and an extension of the summer period (from spring to au­tumn);

■ better spatial and temporal distribution of tourist numbers within the natural sites of a destination, allowing the land­scape to be better protected;

■ opportunities to improve the quality of the product by the attribution of labels (e.g. national or regional park, geoparc), thus increasing tourist attraction.

6 References

- Amirou, R. (1999). Patrimoine, terroir et commu­nication touristique. La relation entre imaginaire et communication. Cahier Espaces, 64, 43-48.

- Arino, D. (1999). Communication image et com­munication produit. Comment optimiser les re-tombées? Cahier Espaces, 64, 6-12.

- Badman, T. (1994). Interpreting Earth science sites for the public. In D. O'Halloran et al. (Eds.), Geological and Landscape Conservation (pp429-432). London: Geological Society.

- Barras, C.-V. (1987). Le développement régional a motricité touristique. De la region polarisée à la région-systéme. Documents économiques, 33, Fri-bourg: Editions Universitaires.

- Biot, V. & Gauchon, C. (2005). Etat des lieux du tourisme souterrain en France: la fin d'un cycle? Karstologia, 45-46, 41-54.

- Bringer,J.-P. (1993). L'interprétation de notre pat­rimoine. L'introduction du concept en France: bi-lan et perspectives. Cahier Espaces, hors série, 158-168.

- Cavallin, A., & Marchetti, M. (1995). Geomor­phology and environmental impact assessment: a practical approach. In M. Marchetti et al. (Eds.), Geomorphology and Environmental Impact As­sessment (pp99-107). Quaderni di Geodinamica Alpina e Quaternaria, 3.

- Chadefaud, M. (1988). Aux origines du tourisme dans les pays de l'Adour: du mythe à l'espace. Un essai de géographie historique. Pau: Cahiers de l'Université.

- Durand, H., & Jouvet, F. (2003). Le temps du tourisme triomphant. In J. Spindler & H. Durand (Eds.), Le tourisme au XXIe siécle (pp29-57). Paris: L'Harmattan.

- Eder, W. (1999). "UNESCO GEOPARKS "- A new-initiative for protection and sustainable develop­ment of the Earth's heritage. N. Jb. Geol. Palaont. Abh., 214, 1-2,353-358.

- Fenell, D. A. (2003). Ecotourism. An introduction. London and New York: Routledge.

- Hose, T. A. (1998). Mountains of fire from the present to the past - or effectively communicat­ing the wonder of geology to tourists. Geologica Balcanica, 28, 3-4,77-85.

- Knafou, R., Bruston, M., Deprest, F., Duhamel, P., Gay, J.-C. & Sacareau, I. (1997). Une approche géographique du tourisme. Espaces du tourisme, 3, 193-204.

- Larwood, J., & Prosser, C. (1996). The nature of the urban geological resource: an overview. In M. R. Bennett et al. (Eds), Geology on your doorstep: the role of urban geology in Earth Heritage Con­servation (ppl8-30). London: Geological Society.

- Larwood, J., & Prosser, C. (1998). Geotourism, conservation and society. Geologica Balcanica, 28, 3-4,97-100.

- Mangeant, J . & Dany, C. (1999). Le grand voyage dans le temps de l'Ardèche. Cahier Espaces, 64, 53-57.

- Marthaler, M. (2002). Le Cervin est-il africain? Une histoire géologique entre les Alpes et notre planète. Le Mont-sur-Lausanne: Editions LEP.

- Marty, D. & Hug, W. A. (2003). Das Dinosaurier-Spurenvorkommen von Courtedoux, Kanton Ju­ra: dauerhafter Geotopschutz und nachhaltige Nutzung. Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Geologis-chen Gesellschaft, 31, 115-121.

- Mathelet, E. (2002). Les attentes contemporaines de la clientèle face au tourisme de la montagne. In Le tourisme d'été dans les Alpes, quel avenir ? (ppl5-19). Actes du Symposium International du Tourisme, 24-25 octobre 2002, Martigny.

- Mattig, U. (2003). Richthnien zur Ausweisung als Nationaler GeoPark. Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 25,37-41.

- Moisset, P. (1997). L'interprétation comme contri­bution a l'enrichissement de l'offre touristique. Cahier Espaces, hors série, 132-133.

- Morucci, B. (2003). La demande touristique: une approche de son évolution et de ses perspectives. In J. Spindler & H. Durand (Eds.), Le tourisme au XXIe siécle (ppl33-155). Paris: L'Harmattan.

- Origet du Cluzeau, C. (1998). Le tourisme cul­ture!. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

- Origet du Cluzeau, C. & Vicériat, P. (2000). Le tourisme des années 2010. "La mise en futur de 1'offre ". Paris: La Documentation française.

- Page, K. N. (1994). Information signs for geologi­cal and geomorphological sites: basic principles. In D. O'Halloran et al. (Eds), Geological and Landscape Conservation (pp433-437). London: Geological Society.

- Panizza, M. & Piacente, S. (1993). Geomorpholog­ical assets evaluation. Zeitschr. für Geomorpholo-gie N.F., 87, 13-18.

- Panizza, M., Piacente, S. (2003). Geomorfologia culturale. Bologna: Pitagora Ed.

- Pralong, J.-P. (2005). A method for assessing tourist potential and use of geomorphological sites. Géomorphologie: relief, processus, environ-nement, 3,189-196.

- Pralong, J.-P. (2006a). Géotourisme et utilisation de sites naturels d'intérét pour les sciences de la Terre: les régions de Crans-Montana-Sierre (Valais, Alpes suisses) et Chamonix-Mont-Blanc (Haute-Savoie, Alpes françaises). Thèse de doctor-at, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des géo-sciences et de l'environnement, Travaux et Recherches, 33.

- Pralong, J.-P. (2006b). Target Groups and Geodi-dactic Tools: the Need to Adapt Tourist Product and Demand. Geografia fisica e dinamica quater­naria, 29, 2, 22-30.

- Pralong, J.-P., Reynard, E. (2005). A proposal for a classification of geomorphological sites depend­ing on their tourist value. Il Quaternario, 18, 1, 315-321.

- Quaranta, G. (1993). Geomorphological assets: conceptual aspect and application in the area of Croda da Lago (Cortina d'Ampezzo, Dolomites). In M. Panizza et al. (Eds.), European Intensive Course on Applied Geomorphology (pp49-60). Università degli Studi di Modena, Istituto di Ge-ologia.

- Reynard, E. (2005). Geomorphological sites, pub­lic policies and property rights. Conceptualiza­tion and examples from Switzerland. Il Quater­nario, 18, 1, 323-332.

- Rivas, V., Rix, K., Francés, E., Cendrero, A. & Brunsden, D. (1997). Geomorphological indica­tors for environmental impact assessment: con­sumable and non-consumable geomorphological resources. Geomorphology, 18, 169-182.

24 Tourism Review, Vol 61, No 3/2006

J.-P. Pralong: Geotourism

- Siegrist, D. (2000). Potentiel de création de valeur pour un courisme orienté vers le paysage. In CIPRA (Ed.), Tourisme dans les Alpes. Qualité économique - qualité environnementale (ppl07-115). Acres de la conference annuelle de la CIPRA, 12-14 octobre 2000,Trente.

- Stock, M., Dehoorne, O., Duhamel, P., Gay,J.-C., Knafou, R., Lazzarotti, O., Sacareau, I. & Violier, P. (2003). Le tourisme. Acteurs, lieux et enjeux. Paris: Belin.

-Tiberghien, B. (1997). Pour unemise en valeur des sites naturels. Cahier Espaces, hors série, 49-51.

-Tommasi, G. (2002). Geosites and geological mapping: a starting point to make geology popu­lar for tourist. In P. Coratza & M. Marchetti (Eds.), Geomorphological Sites: research, assess­ment and improvement (pp90-91). Proceedings of the workshop, 19-22 June 2002, Modena.

- Xun, Z., & Ting, Z. (2003). The socio-economic benefits of establishing National Geoparks in China. Episodes, 26, 4, 302-309.

Tourism Review, Vol 6 1 , No 3/2006 25