Quantifying Geodiversity at the Continental Scale: Limitations and Prospects

Abstract

Geodiversity, defined as the natural range of geological, geomorphological, hydrological, and soil features, has been explored in a growing number of studies at different spatial scales. However, most research efforts have been directed at analysing geodiversity at a fine-scale. Here, an estimation of the geodiversity of the European subcontinent is performed using six available high-resolution global data sets that describe the diversity of selected features of the abiotic environment. Six maps representing geomorphological, geological, hydrological, hydrogeological, soil, and topographical diversity are compiled using the methods of centroid analysis and kernel density estimation. The present contribution identifies areas with high values of most geodiversity variables which were not previously studied, nor are included in the network of international geoparks. The study also shows that, although remote sensing images and digital elevation models allow one to grasp a significant understanding of geodiversity on the continental scale, fine-resolution and process-oriented geological data sets are required to further enhance the quality of large-scale geodiversity assessments. To ensure interoperability between studies, a consensus is necessary regarding the analytical methods, classification rules, standardised indices and dictionaries. Without this, comparisons of geodiversity evaluations across different scales and between distant study areas remain difficult.

Global geodiversity components are not equally represented in UNESCO Global Geoparks

“…important aspects of geodiversity [6] and have been assessed in many studies that quantify geodiversity by using index-based methods [9,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36]. To date, most geodiversity-related research on UGGs involves qualitative studies and emphasizes their educational and touristic values [37,38].…”

“…The occurrence of soil types and hydrological features (e.g. rivers and lakes) and their spatial patterns are not explicitly taken into account, although these are considered important aspects of geodiversity [ 6 ] and have been assessed in many studies that quantify geodiversity by using index-based methods [ 9 , 29 – 36 ]. To date, most geodiversity-related research on UGGs involves qualitative studies and emphasizes their educational and touristic values [ 37 , 38 ].…”

“…Research across 39 UGGs in China suggests that the spatial distribution of the Chinese UGGs is ‘extremely non-uniform’ [ 39 ], and significantly affected by government support, tourism and infrastructure, and to a lesser extent by landform and the distribution of geosites. Similarly, for the European continent UGGs have been reported to be unevenly distributed [ 36 ]. For a global assessment, considering the wide variety of landscapes, a standardized method to quantify geodiversity across large areas is necessary [ 36 , 40 , 41 ].…”

“…Similarly, for the European continent UGGs have been reported to be unevenly distributed [ 36 ]. For a global assessment, considering the wide variety of landscapes, a standardized method to quantify geodiversity across large areas is necessary [ 36 , 40 , 41 ]. Over regional and national extents, index-based approaches have been developed, in which thematic maps (e.g.…”

Towards a taxonomy of geodiversity

“…Despite the substantial need for data and progress in the field, there is a lack of a comprehensive classification system for mapping and measuring geodiversity [21,22,[24][25][26].…”