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

Abstract

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.

Landscapes of the Yazd-Ardakan Plain (Iran) and the Assessment of Geotourism—Contribution to the Promotion and Practice of Geotourism and Ecotourism

“…176-178) [9,96] are treated as tourist geo-destinations by ecoand geotourists [97,98] by revealing the iconic meaning of their destination capacity [11,99]. All these factors contribute to the attractiveness and competitiveness of these landscapes as parts of a whole or as a whole, which are reinforced by image elements [76][77][78][79] manifested through aesthetic and cultural values [39] as well as emotional reactions.…”

“…In other studies, geotourism is based on geology and landscapes [10,35], including features of natural, subnatural, and humanised landscapes [36,37]. Landscapes themselves become territorial resources for tourism [38,39], promoting the image of the countryside [40,41] and conservation [42][43][44][45], geotourism and recreation activities, and preservation [31,46,47]. Geotourism and ecotourism merge thematically, are close and complementary, and are types of tourism that highlight and orient tourists towards non-consumptive activities of biotic and abiotic wilderness [5,48,49] that should not be degraded by visiting and exploring.…”

The magnitude rule in geoheritage site inventories

“…Volcanic areas have also frequently been evaluated for geoheritage and geotourism promotion, and an implicit criterion of magnitude is once again evident in the works analysed (e.g. Guijón et al, 2011; Tefogoum et al, 2014; Velazquez et al, 2014, Kelley and Salazar, 2017; Pérez-Umaña et al, 2019; Bussar and Reynard., 2022). These inventories attribute prime relevance to prominent craters (a main crater ∼1320 m in diameter) and cinder cones (∼220 m high and ∼950 m in diameter) in Poás (Costa Rica), Paricutín (Mexico) and Teide (Spain); to large and spectacular collapse craters and long volcanic tubes in Santa Cruz (Galapagos islands); to an unusual and prominent impact crater (of ∼3.6 km and ∼275 m depth) in Colônia (São Paulo, Brazil); and to kilometric diameter-depth calderas, large crater lakes, clusters of volcanic cones and spectacular culminating domes (the highest points of the caldera) in Manengouba Volcano (Cameroon).…”

Les paysages géomorphologiques du Haut Atlas central (Maroc) : potentiel éducatif et éléments pour la médiation scientifique

“…However, a high educative potential greatly facilitates the transmission of the message that the interpreter is trying to convey to his audience. Geomorphological landscapes - defined as landscapes whose geomorphological component is of heritage interest (Reynard, 2005;Bussard and Reynard, 2022a) - are interesting supports for the dissemination of scientific knowledge in geomorphology. Their educative potential could be defined, as suggested in the literature, in terms of readability and representativeness of their forms and processes (Grandgirard, 1997;Pralong, 2006), but also according to their usefulness as objects for interpretation (Coratza and Giusti, 2005).…”

“…Les paysages géomorphologiques sont des paysages dont la composante géomorphologique a un intérêt patrimonial (Reynard, 2005 ;Bussard et Reynard, 2022a), c'est-à-dire qui sont considérés par des acteurs de la société comme dignes d'être protégés et transmis aux générations futures (Di Méo, 2008). Comme d'autres catégories de sites géopatrimoniaux (Reynard et Brilha, 2018), les paysages géomorphologiques peuvent être mobilisés en tant que ressources territoriales et participer de manière significative aux stratégies de développement local (Hobléa et al, 2017), principalement dans les domaines de l'éducation environnementale (Reynard et Coratza, 2016) et du géotourisme, une forme spécifique de tourisme de nature axée sur la découverte de la géologie et de la géomorphologie (Hose, 1995(Hose, , 2012Newsome et Dowling, 2010.…”