Assessing the ecological value of  dynamic mountain geomorphosites

Bussard, Jonathan; Giaccone, Elisa

doi:10.5194/gh-76-385-2021

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 85 publications

(123 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For this reason, we will not evaluate it as a heritage value. In addition, there are particularly few discussions in the literature about the evaluation of the ecological value of geomorphosites and the detailed criteria for evaluating it are not clearly defined (Bussard and Giaccone 2021). Therefore, in this article we will not be able to give an accurate evaluation of the ecological value.…”

Section: Geomorphological Landscape Assessment Methodsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Heritage Value and Stakeholders’ Perception of Four Geomorphological Landscapes in Southern Iceland

Bussard

Reynard

2022

Geoheritage

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper has two main objectives: (1) to assess the heritage value of four geomorphological landscapes in Southern Iceland from a geomorphological perspective and (2) to see to what extent the heritage values assigned by different local stakeholders overlap with this assessment. The concept of “geomorphological landscape”, that we define as a landscape whose geomorphological component is of heritage interest, is a scale of analysis that can be understood by different groups of people and that reflects subjective perceptions of the landscape. The evaluation of the heritage value of four geomorphological landscapes has shown that their geoscientific, aesthetic and cultural values are particularly high. Indeed, thanks to their rarity, representativeness, integrity and paleogeographic interest, all four sites have a geoscientific value ranging from 0.81 to 0.94 (the maximum possible score is 1). They also constitute spectacular and beautiful landscapes and have acquired a relevant cultural value because of the major impacts that volcanic eruptions and glaciers advances have had on the local population. Not surprisingly, the heritage awareness of managers of protected areas is high. The interviews also show that other types of stakeholders, such as tourism services providers, tourism promoters and representatives of local authorities, are also aware, to some extent, of the high geoscientific value. The societal and institutional recognition of the heritage value of these geomorphological landscapes is closely linked to their use as territorial resources for tourism.

show abstract

Section: Geomorphological Landscape Assessment Methodsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Heritage Value and Stakeholders’ Perception of Four Geomorphological Landscapes in Southern Iceland

Bussard

Reynard

2022

Geoheritage

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Naturally, different approaches to assess geodiversity are used, for example, in geoheritage [ 95 ] versus ecological [ 4 ] research, although efforts to evaluate both heritage and diversity values exist especially at more local scales (e.g. [ 96 , 97 ]), and in protected areas [ 98 ]. Classifying and measuring geodiversity is not straightforward (as also discussed by [ 2 ]), yet our data provides a starting point for quantitative assessment of geodiversity at large geographical extent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geodiversity data for Europe

Toivanen,

Maliniemi,

Hjort

et al. 2024

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geodiversity is an essential part of nature's diversity. However, geodiversity is insufficiently understood in terms of its spatial distribution and its relationship to biodiversity over large spatial extents. Here, we present European geodiversity data at resolutions of 1 km and 10 km. We assess terrestrial geodiversity quantitatively as a richness variable (georichness) using a commonly employed grid-based approach. The data incorporate aspects of geological, pedological, geomorphological and hydrological diversity, which are also available as separate richness variables. To evaluate the data, we correlated European georichness with empirically tested national georichness data from Finland, revealing a positive correlation at both 1 km ( r p = 0.37, p < 0.001) and 10 km ( r p = 0.59, p < 0.001) resolutions. We also demonstrate potential uses of the European data by correlating georichness with vascular plant species richness in two contrasting example areas: Finland and Switzerland. The positive correlations between georichness and species richness in Finland ( r p = 0.34, p < 0.001) and Switzerland ( r p = 0.26, p < 0.001) further support the use of our data in geodiversity–biodiversity research. Moreover, there is great potential beyond geodiversity–biodiversity questions, as the data can be exploited across different regions, ecosystems and scales. These geodiversity data provide an insight on abiotic diversity in Europe and establish a quantitative large-scale geodiversity assessment method applicable worldwide. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Geodiversity for science and society’.

show abstract

“…Three additional values were evaluated qualitatively: the aesthetic, cultural and ecological values. For the latter, we focused especially on the impact of geomorphological landforms and processes on the richness and rarity of plant species (Bussard and Giaccone, 2021). After evaluating the present heritage values of inherited and active landforms, we examined how future changes in the glacial landscape might affect the heritage values in the future.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation of World Heritage glacial landscapes in a changing climate: The Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch case

Bussard,

Reynard

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many glacial landscapes on all continents are inscribed on the World Heritage List. Due to climate change, most of the glaciers are retreating rapidly, thus questioning their Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). Ice loss could indeed reduce or modify the heritage values of the UNESCO World Heritage properties where glaciers are the core of the OUV and even question their inscription on the World Heritage List. In a future with fewer or without glaciers, at least two components of the OUV of World Heritage glacial landscapes could be affected: the aesthetic value (criterion vii), which could be reduced if glaciers disappear, and the geoheritage value (criterion viii), which is partly based on current glaciological processes that would no longer exist without ice. This presentation aims to clarify what constitute the heritage values of glacial landscapes and outlines how they could evolve in a future with less (or without) ice. For two sites in the UNESCO Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch property (the Great Aletsch Glacier and the Upper Lauterbrunnen Valley), we describe the evolution of the glacial landscape using a Past-Present-Future framework. We then evaluate the present and post-glacial heritage values according to criteria used in the literature on geomorphosites. We outline two main issues: 1. The two sites are characterized by a very high palaeogeographical interest: the inherited glacial landforms around the Great Aletsch Glacier and Lake Oberhorn have allowed the reconstruction of Holocene glacial stages. In the future, the inherited landforms of high palaeogeographical interest and the para- and periglacial processes that develop in post-glacier conditions are likely to gain interest, while the dynamics of the glacier itself, which is an important part of the current geoscientific value, will decline and even be lost when the glacier disappears. As glaciers retreat, the geoscientific value will therefore depend more and more on the inherited glacial landforms, which allow the understanding of the Earth and climate history, and less and less on the glacier itself and its dynamics. As the inherited landforms can be fragile, are non-renewable and will become more central to the heritage value, their protection is an issue. 2. The aesthetic value of glacial landscapes could decrease because of the disappearance of the glacier (landscape greying). One possible adaptation could be a shift from glacier tourism, which is mainly oriented towards the contemplation of an aesthetic landscape, to geotourism, where the understanding of landscape evolution is proposed to the public.

show abstract

Assessing the ecological value of dynamic mountain geomorphosites

Cited by 11 publications

References 85 publications

Heritage Value and Stakeholders’ Perception of Four Geomorphological Landscapes in Southern Iceland

Heritage Value and Stakeholders’ Perception of Four Geomorphological Landscapes in Southern Iceland

Geodiversity data for Europe

Conservation of World Heritage glacial landscapes in a changing climate: The Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About