Quantitative assessment of geoheritage with the GAM and MEREC-based PROMETHEE-GAIA method

A Quantitative Assessment of Selected Potential Geosites From Gümüşhane (Türki̇ye) for the Development of Geotourism

“…The minimal weight difference criteria are SV7, PEU1, PEU5, PEU7, PEU10, PTU7, PTU9 and DR4. These results are consistent with studies Dede, 2023a-2023b;Dede and Zorlu, 2023;Zorlu et al, 2023) stating that the criteria used in geosite evaluations should be weighted according to the location and conditions of geosites.…”

“…The most popular approaches used in geosite evaluation are analyses in which numerical assessments are based on various criteria and related indicators (Coratza et al, 2019). In addition, it is stated that the criteria used in geosite evaluations should be weighted according to the location and conditions of the geosites (Zorlu and Dede, 2023). Therefore, the current study focuses on using MCDM techniques in geosite evaluation.…”

“…Therefore, the current study focuses on using MCDM techniques in geosite evaluation. Weighting the criteria in evaluating geosites and determining which geosite is important according to more than one criterion is seen as an MCDM problem (Zorlu and Dede, 2023). MCDM, a helpful approach to choosing the most suitable alternatives with more than one criterion, has been very popular recently and has wide application areas.…”

“…MCDM, a helpful approach to choosing the most suitable alternatives with more than one criterion, has been very popular recently and has wide application areas. However, studies using MCDM techniques in geosite assessment studies are limited (Datta, 2020;Dede and Zorlu, 2023;Jia et al, 2022;Mandal & Chakrabarty, 2021;Zorlu and Dede, 2023). For example, Zorlu and Dede (2023) stated that MCDM approaches would provide researchers with an essential insight into this subject area in their study in which they evaluated the geoheritage potentials of glacial landforms in the Yalnızçam Mountains (Turkey) using fuzzy SWARA-based EDAS methods.…”

“…However, studies using MCDM techniques in geosite assessment studies are limited (Datta, 2020;Dede and Zorlu, 2023;Jia et al, 2022;Mandal & Chakrabarty, 2021;Zorlu and Dede, 2023). For example, Zorlu and Dede (2023) stated that MCDM approaches would provide researchers with an essential insight into this subject area in their study in which they evaluated the geoheritage potentials of glacial landforms in the Yalnızçam Mountains (Turkey) using fuzzy SWARA-based EDAS methods. Therefore, the present study proposes an MCDM framework for evaluating seven selected geosites in Gümüşhane province.…”