Promoting diversity in geoheritage evaluation: creating an evaluation method for the scientific value of Quaternary sites in arid environments

Abstract

A rigorous assessment is an essential part of geoconservation, and choosing an appropriate evaluation method is essential for this process. Globally, an increasing number of sites are being assessed for their geoheritage values, but the most popular methods have been created by researchers with experiences centred in Europe, without considerations of regional differences. To understand whether regional perspectives are required in the evaluation process, this study developed a new method targeting the scientific value of Quaternary geoheritage sites in arid environments, using input from 49 researchers in geosciences and related disciplines with interests in arid landscapes. The results demonstrated the need for a new or modified method, given the different preferences in the weighting system and the necessity to include additional criteria specific to the type of sites targeted by the study. The strong preference to include a new criterion on connections with archaeology/anthropology highlighted the significance of the interdisciplinary scientific values of Quaternary geoheritage sites in arid environments. These findings imply the need for regional diversity or adjustments in geoheritage evaluation. Future research is required to consider such differences for geoheritage values beyond the scientific dimension, such as educational values and touristic values in diverse geographical settings. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue 'Geodiversity for science and society'.

Geodiversity for science and society

“…Elsewhere in a geoheritage and geoconservation context, Monge-Ganuzas et al [15] describe geoconservation achievements within the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and offer further recommendations. Arid Quaternary geoheritage sites are specifically considered in the context of promoting inclusion and diversity as part of the assessment process [16], while the dilemma faced by many geoheritage sites of balancing protection with geotourism, including valuation of geodiversity, is tackled by Anougmar et al [17]. Schrodt et al [3] also provide an important update on EGVs and propose areas of focus to speed up development and further integration of EGVs across the scientific and policy communities.…”

“…[ 15 ] describe geoconservation achievements within the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and offer further recommendations. Arid Quaternary geoheritage sites are specifically considered in the context of promoting inclusion and diversity as part of the assessment process [ 16 ], while the dilemma faced by many geoheritage sites of balancing protection with geotourism, including valuation of geodiversity, is tackled by Anougmar et al . [ 17 ].…”